[straube]

I've seen a couple descriptions of continuations after 1N (weak) dbl (penalty) which suggest that it creates a forcing auction until doubler's partner shows weakness by bidding a suit.

1N dbl 2C (natural) P is forcing
1N dbl 2C (natural) dbl is takeout

1N dbl 2C (stayman) P is forcing
1N dbl 2C (stayman) P 2H dbl is takeout

Basically, dbl of the first natural bid (whether that is opener or responder) is takeout and then dbls revert back to penalty.

This all makes sense to me, but it conflicts with a rule I was taught that "after a penalty dbl all subsequent doubles are penalty".

So does it really matter whether pass and double are inverted here? Why can't pass be takeout and dbl be penalty?

[awm]

The old standard was that double was penalty.

I think the main advantage of takeout doubles is that you don't have to define this as a forcing auction. Usually one of the two partners will have the right hand for a takeout double, so the inference is that if advancer passes after 1NT-X-bid, he either wants to convert a double to penalty or he has a very weak hand. If the auction passes back to doubler and he can tell from his hand that partner is unlikely to hold a penalty pass (i.e. he has length in the opponents' suit) then he can simply pass the two-level contract out.

This fits my general rule of "if partner has shown no values, then pass is not forcing."

[Jlall]

I also don't like the X to create a force but my understanding is that few experts agree with me (and adam) on that one, and that it's common to play X creates a force through 2H.

Frances has posted before why even if you play pass as forcing, doubles should be takeout.

[straube]

Yeah. I saw one description of it creating a force through 2H and another through 2S (i.e. opponent's can't play a contract undoubled through this level and not undoubled higher if advancer shows values).

I can think of hands where it would be uncomfortable for advancer. Like the bidding goes 1N dbl 2H and you have xxx xxxx xxx xxx and have to decide what to bid.

OTOH, seems like most of the time it's our hand and we want to have passing forces available. One important thing is that a forcing pass clues doubler in when opener makes a bid (i.e. he can make a forcing pass or takeout double).

I'm still wondering why one couldn't play this method but have double be penalty and pass be noncommittal.

I think then that after 1N dbl 2H P P dbl I could more safely pass with something like Axx xxx Kxxx xxx because I would know that partner had a cooperative or penalty double.

[jdonn]

I have the partner of the doubler pull right away with 0-4 (if responder passes). There should also be lebensohl on many of these auctions by either player after a suit bid. So for example:
1NT X 2♠ P
P X P 2NT
being lebensohl showing up to about 4 with a direct suit bid showing 5-7 (mistyped earlier - 8+ would act over 2♠). In fact I think it should be the same thing directly over 2♠ as well but splitting up 5-7 from 8+ in that case.

[awm]

straube, on Apr 6 2010, 02:08 PM, said:

I think then that after 1N dbl 2H P P dbl I could more safely pass with something like Axx xxx Kxxx xxx because I would know that partner had a cooperative or penalty double.

If you're playing takeout doubles, you're supposed to double 2♥ with that hand.

To some degree the double says "I have some values, no long suit to name, don't want to double for penalty myself, but would sit for a penalty double if you have one." It's not a true "takeout double" and it's pretty much mandatory to double for takeout on some flattish hands without a trump stack.

[straube]

awm, on Apr 6 2010, 02:33 PM, said:

straube, on Apr 6 2010, 02:08 PM, said:

I think then that after 1N dbl 2H P P dbl I could more safely pass with something like Axx xxx Kxxx xxx because I would know that partner had a cooperative or penalty double.

If you're playing takeout doubles, you're supposed to double 2♥ with that hand.

To some degree the double says "I have some values, no long suit to name, don't want to double for penalty myself, but would sit for a penalty double if you have one." It's not a true "takeout double" and it's pretty much mandatory to double for takeout on some flattish hands without a trump stack.

Right. That's how I understand it. I was supposing that if we were playing penalty doubles that I could pass that hand and then accept partner's cooperative/penalty double. If I were to play a method where pass and double showed values, I'm just not seeing why these methods usually want the double to be takeout as opposed to pass.

We had a similar discussion about pass double inversion and I finally figured out why strong clubbers may invert the meanings of pass and double at higher levels (3S for example).

Here we're at much lower levels, so what is the purpose of inverting pass and double?

[awm]

Besides the possibility of making this auction non-forcing, the main reason is that it creates more sequences.

For example, suppose you see the auction 1NT-X-2♥ (to play). Advancer can distinguish the following hand types with clubs:

(1) Bid 3♣ directly
(2) Bid 2NT lebensohl, then pass partner's 3♣
(3) Double, then correct to clubs if partner bids spades/NT
(4) Pass, then remove to clubs when partner doubles
(5) Pass, then bid 2NT over partner's double and pass 3♣

The suggestion is that (1) shows a good hand, (2) is weaker but still shows real clubs, (3) is a flexible hand with five clubs, short hearts, and some interest in other contracts, (4) shows fewer clubs than the first two options (usually five and not six) but with too many hearts to double, and (5) shows a really bad hand with five or even four clubs.

In comparison, if you play double as penalty you lose some options. You have:

(1) Bid 3♣ directly
(2) Bid 2NT lebensohl, then pass 3♣
(3) Pass, then remove partner's balance to 3♣
(4) Maybe pass, then remove partner's balance to 2NT and pass 3♣

Note that one option is entirely gone (because if you double, partner almost always passes). Another option may be limited, since my pass presumably is more "takeout oriented" and partner will quite often do something other than double (even something like bidding 2♠ on a four-card suit).

[akhare]

awm, on Apr 6 2010, 05:31 PM, said:

Besides the possibility of making this auction non-forcing, the main reason is that it creates more sequences.

For example, suppose you see the auction 1NT-X-2♥ (to play). Advancer can distinguish the following hand types with clubs:

(1) Bid 3♣ directly
(2) Bid 2NT lebensohl, then pass partner's 3♣
(3) Double, then correct to clubs if partner bids spades/NT
(4) Pass, then remove to clubs when partner doubles
(5) Pass, then bid 2NT over partner's double and pass 3♣

This is a pretty good list, but what does a hand that wants to compete / scramble with both minors do?

It seems that option 3) is best suited for showing the hand that wants to compete in either minor and 5) is probably best for the scramble hand...

[nigel_k]

Definitely takeout doubles of their first natural suit bid.

I think pass nonforcing is better in theory but it is just so easy for them to psych as they know partner won't bid much. So if RHO bids 2H after partner's X and you have hearts and some values you can't just pass confidently knowing partner will reopen because he may have heart length as well. So I would play pass forcing up to 2H.

[straube]

nigel_k, on Apr 7 2010, 01:53 AM, said:

Definitely takeout doubles of their first natural suit bid.

I think pass nonforcing is better in theory but it is just so easy for them to psych as they know partner won't bid much. So if RHO bids 2H after partner's X and you have hearts and some values you can't just pass confidently knowing partner will reopen because he may have heart length as well. So I would play pass forcing up to 2H.

I like that thought about the takeout dbl of their first (presumably only their first) bid suit.

The book I'm reading recommends to takeout dbl with only 2 or fewer in their naturally bid suit...but it recommends this by both partners.

So I'm not sure what happens if it goes...

1N dbl 2H (psyche) P (forcing and not short in hearts) P ?

and doubler has hearts! The book recommends that a second dbl by him is takeout. So there's no way to expose a psyche...or more commonly, no way to penalize them when we're 4/3 or 3/3 in hearts.

[CamHenry]

Partner and I play this quite simply - if doubler's partner has shown values (by passing if responder passes, or by making a different call over responder's call), doubles are all penalty and passes are all forcing.

If doubler's partner has pulled the double (i.e. 1NT-X-P-2suit), doubles are penalty again, but doubler needs a particularly suitable hand (i.e. you don't double just because you had a penalty double the first time around!).

Doubles are takeout by the first doubler's partner (e.g. 1NT-X-2D-X where 2D is natural), and show values (not specific about suit) where responder's call is artificial. In both these cases, subsequent doubles are penalties.

If responder redoubles, a pass shows enough to penalise, while bidding is weak.

[straube]

nigel_k, on Apr 7 2010, 01:53 AM, said:

Definitely takeout doubles of their first natural suit bid.

I think pass nonforcing is better in theory but it is just so easy for them to psych as they know partner won't bid much. So if RHO bids 2H after partner's X and you have hearts and some values you can't just pass confidently knowing partner will reopen because he may have heart length as well. So I would play pass forcing up to 2H.

So if 2H is passed around to doubler, do you play his second double as takeout or penalty/cooperative? My book says takeout. I think they're not catering to psyches and not catering to doubling when both partners have exactly 3 cards in responder's suit. Maybe that's a good decision. So one can double them with 4/2 or 4/1 breaks.

[straube]

awm, on Apr 6 2010, 05:31 PM, said:

Besides the possibility of making this auction non-forcing, the main reason is that it creates more sequences.

For example, suppose you see the auction 1NT-X-2♥ (to play). Advancer can distinguish the following hand types with clubs:

(1) Bid 3♣ directly
(2) Bid 2NT lebensohl, then pass partner's 3♣
(3) Double, then correct to clubs if partner bids spades/NT
(4) Pass, then remove to clubs when partner doubles
(5) Pass, then bid 2NT over partner's double and pass 3♣

The suggestion is that (1) shows a good hand, (2) is weaker but still shows real clubs, (3) is a flexible hand with five clubs, short hearts, and some interest in other contracts, (4) shows fewer clubs than the first two options (usually five and not six) but with too many hearts to double, and (5) shows a really bad hand with five or even four clubs.

In comparison, if you play double as penalty you lose some options. You have:

(1) Bid 3♣ directly
(2) Bid 2NT lebensohl, then pass 3♣
(3) Pass, then remove partner's balance to 3♣
(4) Maybe pass, then remove partner's balance to 2NT and pass 3♣

Note that one option is entirely gone (because if you double, partner almost always passes). Another option may be limited, since my pass presumably is more "takeout oriented" and partner will quite often do something other than double (even something like bidding 2♠ on a four-card suit).

I understand about sequence creation but not sure how it would look if pass is forcing. Would you consider even playing pass as forcing through 2C or 2D?

[awm]

Actually I was assuming pass was forcing in that post.

The point is that if you play double as penalty (and pass forcing):

(1) Double ends the auction most of the time, so doesn't create sequences.
(2) Pass is forcing, but partner will very often do something other than double (even bidding a four-card suit!) which might consume space and doesn't clarify partner's hand type very well.

If you play double as takeout (and pass forcing):

(1) Double usually gives you another chance to bid.
(2) Pass usually gets a double from partner, which conserves space (and gives you another chance)

[straube]

Appreciate all the help.

I think then you were assuming pass was forcing but didn't promise values...because of option 5. I think I'd rather bid immediately with a bad hand so as to take us out of a force. Say it goes
1N dbl 2C (natural) P (f) 3C is opener's pass now forcing or not? If advancer has shown values, then it would be and a subsequent double by advancer would be penalty.

It seems like once someone has used the takeout double that subsequent doubles should revert to penalty. Say the bidding goes 1N dbl 2C (natural) dbl 2H (natural) dbl should be penalty.

This sequence isn't likely to come up, but some play DONT (for instance) and opener is allowed to change suit.

1N dbl 2D P 2H dbl(takeout) 2S dbl (penalty)

What do you make of all this akhare?