[Orla]

Isn't it true that when opponents double our opening bid, it is correct to redouble to show 10+ points? If this is so, is it law?
Well, that is what we play, however this hand came up tonight and it kind of puts everything into question

Ok let me show you the hands
Playing MPs, all vulnerable, I (dealer) had:
♠ K 8 5
♥ void
♦ A J 9 6 5 3
♣ K 10 9 7

I open, LHO doubles partner redoubles. RHO bids 1H.... ok bidding goes:

1♦ - X - XX - 1♥
2♦ - 2♥ - 2♠ - 3♥
3♠ - X .......

The redoubler was holding:
♠ 10 9 7 6 3
♥ K 5
♦ Q 7
♣ A Q 8 2

Looking at it, after the board has been played, I think the redouble is terrible.
I think redoubling and then bidding a suit (with XXXXX) - that the doubler has shown 3+ cards in - is suicidal.

Soooo, now the problem is, consistency:
If we say: "redouble = 10+pts", then any other bid by my partner is a fib.
Personally, on that hand, I would have preferred P to bid 1♠ after Opp's double, but is that wrong?

rla

[rogerclee]

I feel like there has been a lot written about redoubles recently.

A short sort of summary is that you should redouble if you believe that

1) This is the only good way of describing your hand (ex: 3-card limit raise of a major).
2) You will have a good chance to penalize the opponents.

Redoubling just to show 10 points is highly susceptible to being preempted. I would bid 1♠ with the given hand.

[helene_t]

It is somewhat old-fashioned to redbl with all 10+ hands. Modern "standard" is to redbl when:
- you have serious interest in defending a low-level contract doubled, or
- you want to bid a suit below opener's suit but cannot do that because it would be non-forcing.

The hand you show has a suit above opener's suit, so he could just bid 1♠. That is forcing in modern bidding theory.

[the hog]

Hi Orla,
Many players have abandoned the so called "omnibus xx", that is redoubling with any 10+. I think that bid is very poor practise unless you 1) have no fit for pd and wish to penalise the opponents, 2) have no slam aspirations. 3) Don't have a shapely hand.
With the shown hand I would definitely have bid 1S.

(Btw this is not a subject for this forum, but transfer advances are a very nice way to continue over a x, and maybe there are some bif players who might like to explore this method.)

[jtfanclub]

Keeping in mind, as always, that I'm no expert and have been accused of wild ideas...

I like 1♠ with this hand, I also like XX.

I don't have any problem with undervaluing the spade suit. RHO has promised spades, which means any spade honors partner has are going to be badly positioned, and even if you have a fit you're probably going to end up with a bad split. But you can't decide that the spades aren't worth bidding at the 1 level but are worth bidding at the 2 level.

I happen to have the non-standard (I think) agreement with my regular partners that a new suit by the XXer is game forcing...makes life easy in these auctions.

[skjaeran]

I prefer 1♠ over XX here, but I don't think that's the main problem with your auction. After having XXed, your partner shouldn't introduce that empty suit over 2♥, he should support your diamonds and rebid 3♦.

Btw, you might also have rebid 2♣ instead of 2♦, showing more of your shape. Then your partner wouldn't be tempted to introduce spades at all.

[Cascade]

I think redouble after one of a suit has been doubled is way over-rated. It is normally much better to bid a suit.

After redouble you will probably get one penalty for every 10 times the opponents can pre-empt the bidding (even to the two-level) and make life awkward for you.

As an example, after 1m (Dbl) I routinely bid a four-card major as it will be very very hard to find a 4-4 major fit if I start with a redouble.

[badderzboy]

Given the (dubious) quality of people's doubles these days, I use the following approach with some 10+ and no interest in partners suit ie 0-2 cards and where I might want to penalise doubler I would XX.

With a lesser hand or with some interest in partners suit I will make my natural bid IE ignore the double ! so on the hand above a simple 1♠ as I can't penalise ♥s and it is forcing as per normal.

It is also best to discuss / agree what raises of partners suit mean ie is 2NT Truscott/Jordan (or a Jacoby style raise),, are the other raises pre-emptive in nature.

Steve

[1eyedjack]

I think that if you are going to reserve a redouble to show a hand that can double ANY suit that the opponents settle into, it is going to severely restrict the number of hands on which you redouble. So I would not discount redouble on this hand purely on the grounds that you cannot double one particular suit (ie Hearts).

For a beginner or intermediate player, the standard advice seems to be, that for a redouble (1) you should not have primary support for partner, (2) you should be sure that you outgun the opponents in high cards, (3) you should have reasonable prospects to double the opponents where they settle, which typically means the ability to double 2 out of 3 unbid suits, and (4) you should not have a hand that would be difficult to describe but would wish to describe, in the event that the opponents settle in your short suit. This 4th criterion tends to be the hard one to evaluate. With fantastic shape you may get away with an initial redouble on the grounds that there is little that the oppo can do to freeze you out. With a balanced hand you have no interest in bidding suits. It is the hands with a modicum of shape (as with this one) that cause problems.

The infrequency of hands ideally suited to a redouble using the above criteria has led to some regular partnerships adopting artificial uses of redouble (eg as transfer). But for the BIL player this may not be appropriate and better to stick with the stone-age standard.

In that context I do not think that the redouble is all that bad - perhaps a shade on the weak side. It may not be my first choice but neither do I think it is the worst bid that I have seen bandied about in these forums. I might have rebid 2C rather than 2D as opener, and I certainly would not have followed up with 2S as responder the way that it panned out.

[jtfanclub]

badderzboy, on Mar 19 2008, 07:44 AM, said:

Given the (dubious) quality of people's doubles these days, I use the following approach with some 10+ and no interest in partners suit ie 0-2 cards and where I might want to penalise doubler I would XX.

I strongly disagree that it should deny interest in partner's suit, when partner's suit is a minor. Example:

Kx
AJxx
QJTx
xxx

Partner opens a diamond, next player X's. What do you bid?

Well, if you're Cascade, you bid 1♥, and more power to him. My partners expect 5 pieces though. 2♦ is weak, 3♦ is silly on at least 3 levels, 2NT kills any chance of playing in hearts, and if you bid 1NT that's where you're going to play it.

I wouldn't worry about penalizing, though. If the next player bids 1♠, I expect partner to bid 2♥ with 4, not pass it around to me to see if I can penalty X it.

[badderzboy]

Hi JT

I bid 1♥ in this situation , ie I ignore the double and make my natural bid

Steve

[jtfanclub]

badderzboy, on Mar 21 2008, 08:53 AM, said:

Hi JT

I bid 1♥ in this situation , ie I ignore the double and make my natural bid

Steve

Hand again is...

Kx
AJxx
QJTx
xxx

Bidding goes....

1♦ X 1♥ 2♠
??? P ???

Just makes it too easy to pre-empt, in my tiny mind.

[1eyedjack]

jtfanclub, on Mar 21 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

badderzboy, on Mar 21 2008, 08:53 AM, said:

Hi JT

I bid 1♥ in this situation , ie I ignore the double and make my natural bid

Steve

Hand again is...

Kx
AJxx
QJTx
xxx

Bidding goes....

1♦ X 1♥ 2♠
??? P ???

Just makes it too easy to pre-empt, in my tiny mind.

Are you not even more vulnerable to preemption if you make a nebulous redouble that neither promises nor denies support for opener, as well as concealing your Hearts?

[jtfanclub]

1eyedjack, on Mar 21 2008, 02:04 PM, said:

Are you not even more vulnerable to preemption if you make a nebulous redouble that neither promises nor denies support for opener, as well as concealing your Hearts?

Well, we should generally find game when it's there, and in the right strain. And while it's true that the XX is more vulnerable, having 1♥ promising 5 (instead of 4+) makes heart games much easier to find.

You are absolutely right that after 1♦ X XX 2♠ where neither player has enough to force game we really can't compete without very unusual shape. However, for some reason I see that a great deal less then I do the other auction, perhaps because XX is commonly done with a misfit. But that could simply be the level of my opponents.

[badderzboy]

jtfanclub, on Mar 21 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

badderzboy, on Mar 21 2008, 08:53 AM, said:

Hi JT

I bid 1♥ in this situation , ie I ignore the double and make my natural bid

Steve

Hand again is...

Kx
AJxx
QJTx
xxx

Bidding goes....

1♦ X 1♥ 2♠
??? P ???

Just makes it too easy to pre-empt, in my tiny mind.

I dont' see how I'm in a worse position than 1♦-x-xx-2♠ from 1♦-x-1♥-2♠?

If Partner passes he hasn't got 4♥s or he would support and he has opened with a minimum hand and I simply bid 3♦s.

If he dbls then I'm torn between 3♠(asking for a half Spade stop) and 3NT directly.


Steve

[kenberg]

As you can see, opinions differ. Here is what I play, and I find that it is reasonably understood by most partners, even if not discussed. ie, they do the right thing even if they are not sure what I am doing.

Over a minor: 1m-X-?
2m: Normal
3m: Preemptive
New suit at the 1 level: Forcing, natural, a decent four card suit suffices
1NT: Something like a good 8 to a bad 11, flattish. Often this allows pard to compete to the 3 level in one minor or the other.
2NT: Natural, better than 1NT, passable if pard opened a min.
XX: Good values (10+), somewhat an undefined catchall, often interested in defending.
2C when pard has opened a1D: Not forcing, decent suit and values expecting to play there.
Jump shifts: Weak

Over a major:
Pretty much the same except
1M-X-2NT: Artificial. Limit raise or better in M with four trump. Not passable.
XX followed by support in M: Limit raise with 3 trump.

Incidentally the deal that you present is a bit odd. The opponents have an 11 card heart fit, your side has three 8 card fits, but assuming that 3S goes down (I assume you would not be writing otherwise) and 4H goes down (maybe three minor suit tricks and a trump trick) it seems that even with all these fits and super fits the winner is whoever takes the most pessimistic view. Maybe 4C makes from your side, probably not from partner's on the inevitable lead of the stiff spade. Maybe not from your side either.



Edit: The most problematic suggestion, with a partner you haven't discussed this with, is the minor suit auction 1m-X-2N as natural. There aer a fair number of people who play this as a limit raise in the minor. I don't have strong feeling about it, but I usually prefer a useful natural meaning to a useful artificial meaning.