[slyq]

best defense to 1nt defenses there seems very little litreture in general the merits of t/o xs vs penalties of natural overcalls and passing then balancing over artifical bids and what direct xs then show does anyone have a scheme they believe in personaly t/o xs of natural overcalls seem lose there normal effacy in this situation what do people think

[slyq]

never been a good speller my daughter says efficacy is correct spelling

[bill1157]

a scheme that looked promising to me when partner opens 1N is: pass of 2m/1N is forcing X penalty. Pass of 2M/1N is not forcing X is take out.

Bill

[dake50]

As bill1157, Find our M-fit is primary.
So 1N <2M> X for other M;
but 1N <2m> P intends penalty by auto-reopening X;
leaving 1N <2m> immediate X as M-seek, esp. stolen xfer.

[Cascade]

bill1157, on Apr 5 2010, 03:53 AM, said:

pass of 2m/1N is forcing X penalty

Obviously this agreement is very dependent on range.

[Cascade]

I strongly believe that takeout doubles are superior to penalty doubles of natural interference including 2♥ = hearts and a minor and similar.

Over artificial bids e.g. 2♣ Landy or Cappelletti, we play double is simply values around the equivalent of slightly less than an invite or better so establishing ownership of the hand (majority of the strength). After which we play takeout doubles by either partner and new suits by responder are forcing - a simply competitive suit could have been bid on the previous round.

Opener needs to be careful after 1NT (Bid) X (PASS) since depending on the meaning of the bid the overcall might have that suit and PASS. Therefore opener is allowed to bid a four-card suit or 2NT if unwilling to PASS for penalties.

[gwnn]

first x points
second x takeout
third x penalty
later doubles penalty

[Siegmund]

The only book I'm aware of that spends much time on the subject is Kleinman's Notrump Zone. In particular he has some sensible advice as to which responding hands should bid immediately vs. which should wait for the 2nd round when the overcall is artificial, as well as a suggestion for "something better than systems on" over 1NT-2C.

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

[Jlall]

Takeout Xs are much more common by experts now at all levels, but you still see both at the 2 level.

At the very least you must play t/o Xs at the 3 level since otherwise you're screwed, at the 2 level you can get by a lot of the time playing penalty Xs if you play leb or something like that so you have some way to check for 4 of the other major etc.

[nigel_k]

Takeout doubles of their first natural bid are just better, both in theory and practice.

If double is penalty, all the sequences following the double become unusable and this is quite a large percentage of all the sequences available. Since the hand will often belong to your side in a partscore you don't have much bidding space to find out and can't afford to waste any by using penalty doubles.

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:
1) Overcaller doesn't have the suit they bid (e.g. 2♣ = majors)
2) They may have the suit they bid (e.g. 2♣ = ♥ and another)

In scenario 1, you can just double with values and if the next player passes showing clubs, opener has to bid unless they have a penalty pass (i.e good clubs.

In scenario 2, I think it is better for the doubler to promise 3+ cards in the suit the opponent bid. This allows opener to pass much more often. Otherwise opener is under their possible long suit and with no guarantee of any trumps opposite so opener will need to almost always bid something or run the risk of letting opponents easily make the doubled contract.

[Mbodell]

Siegmund, on Apr 4 2010, 09:56 AM, said:

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

This. When playing weak and/or mini-nt penalty doubles are great. I think the gains to losses are at least 2:1 if not 3:1. I play some form of leb so one suiters or game forcing hands are covered without needing the TO X.

Occasionally I wish I had a TO X on equal point hands, but I usually either pass or sometimes bid 2S on a good 4 card suit.

[gnasher]

nigel_k, on Apr 4 2010, 09:28 PM, said:

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

Some people prefer to play that double should be for takeout of the suit they've bid, regardless of what it means. Over 2♣ showing the majors, for example, they'd double with short clubs, but with club length they'd pass planning to make a takeout double on the next round.

I wish I could explain the benefits of this approach, but I have no idea what they are.

[aguahombre]

Mbodell, on Apr 4 2010, 02:43 PM, said:

Siegmund, on Apr 4 2010, 09:56 AM, said:

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

This. When playing weak and/or mini-nt penalty doubles are great. I think the gains to losses are at least 2:1 if not 3:1. I play some form of leb so one suiters or game forcing hands are covered without needing the TO X.

Occasionally I wish I had a TO X on equal point hands, but I usually either pass or sometimes bid 2S on a good 4 card suit.

You must be old, like me. Double of 2C, if natural or undisclosed 1-suit=stayman, otherwise cards and penalty oriented.

Equally old, and just fine with me is that reopening double by the NT bidder underneath a natural overcall and P P is takeout --but behind the bidder is penalty.

We won't get much support on these fora for that, but oh, well...at least one other person agrees with you.

[jdonn]

Siegmund, on Apr 4 2010, 12:56 PM, said:

Personally I've been very happy with playing penalty doubles by responder, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with any of the alternatives to them -- though this is level-dependent; at anything short of expert level you run into a lot of idiots routinely offering up 800s overcalling on unsuitable hands.

If opener can be expected to reopen with shortness when his hand is decent you get back many penalties. And though you lose some when responder would have doubled but opener can't reopen, they are made up for with others when responder makes a takeout double and opener can pass. Really playing takeout doubles doesn't get you very many fewer penalties and lets you compete a whole lot more often. It's a no brainer to me.

[bluecalm]

Where I live penalty doubles after 1NT - 2X are long forgotten. I didn't think any reasonable partnership still plays them.
Not being able to make negative double with say : KJxx xx KJxx xxx when it goes:
1NT - 2♥ - ?

Is enough form e to forget about penalty one.

[Gerben42]

Quote

If opener can be expected to reopen with shortness when his hand is decent you get back many penalties. And though you lose some when responder would have doubled but opener can't reopen, they are made up for with others when responder makes a takeout double and opener can pass. Really playing takeout doubles doesn't get you very many fewer penalties and lets you compete a whole lot more often. It's a no brainer to me.

To me too. Every time a partner insists on penalty Dbl an "I told you so" hand seems to come up, though, so there are less and less of such partners

[slyq]

what do people think of a cancape defense style similar to the old super precision over 1nt where x of 2d natural an 2h natural is a trans to 4+cd major

[cherdanno]

gnasher, on Apr 4 2010, 05:16 PM, said:

nigel_k, on Apr 4 2010, 09:28 PM, said:

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

Some people prefer to play that double should be for takeout of the suit they've bid, regardless of what it means. Over 2♣ showing the majors, for example, they'd double with short clubs, but with club length they'd pass planning to make a takeout double on the next round.

I wish I could explain the benefits of this approach, but I have no idea what they are.

Others play that a double of 2♣ shows interest in penalizing a major.Which isn't all that different, if you assume that the "takeout doubles" of an artificial 2♣ are sufficiently flexible

[dburn]

gnasher, on Apr 4 2010, 05:16 PM, said:

nigel_k, on Apr 4 2010, 09:28 PM, said:

If their overcall is artificial, you have two scenarios:

Some people prefer to play that double should be for takeout of the suit they've bid, regardless of what it means. Over 2♣ showing the majors, for example, they'd double with short clubs, but with club length they'd pass planning to make a takeout double on the next round.

I wish I could explain the benefits of this approach, but I have no idea what they are.

Advantage number 1: you do not have to worry what the opponents' bidding means. If double of, say, 2♦ is defined as "takeout of diamonds" however 2♦ itself is defined, then [a] partner knows at once what you have and [b] the vast majority of opponents have no idea what to do. "You do realise" said some patronising twit only the other day "that my partner doesn't have to have diamonds?" Informed that we neither knew nor cared whether his partner had diamonds, he spent the next three minutes trying to work out what it would mean if he passed over the double, and the three after that watching his partner go down five in 2♦ doubled on a 3-2 fit.

If you want to play double as one thing over Multi, another thing over Woolsey, a third thing over Astro, a fourth thing over... well, the best of luck to your partner. You don't deserve any.

Advantage number 2: later actions in murky sequences become much easier to interpret. An example that occurred rather longer ago than the one above was this sequence: 1NT-2♥ (both majors)-Pass-2♠-Pass-Pass-3♥. I don't know what your partner would think you had for that auction, but mine knew that I had five hearts, short spades, and a good hand. So he raised to 4♥, which made despite what turned out to be only a 4-1 break, but I could have coped with 5-0. At the other table the auction started 1NT-2♣ (both majors), but the opponents did not have a way to play in hearts after this start, and no other game had a chance.

Advantage number 3: it works even when the opponents do not have what they are supposed to have for their bidding. Sometimes they forget their methods; sometimes they have a liberal interpretation of what constitutes a "two-suiter" (4-3 or even 3-3 are becoming popular with the cool school); sometimes they just psyche. We don't care - if we have doubled (say) hearts for takeout, then bids of hearts by us are cue bids and doubles of everything else are penalty.

Advantage number 4: even I can't forget the system.

[jdonn]

dburn, on Apr 5 2010, 02:23 PM, said:

If you want to play double as one thing over Multi, another thing over Woolsey, a third thing over Astro, a fourth thing over... well, the best of luck to your partner. You don't deserve any.

Well that's a bit harsh. Also a bit exagerated. If the overcall shows the suit being bid (with or without any others) double is takeout, if it shows any other suit(s) then double is penalty interest of the suit(s) shown. I find a way to get by even when the meaning of my double is dependent on receiving a correct explanation of the overcall.