[Cascade]

What is expert standard on this auction?

(1♥) Pass (Pass) 2♦
(2♥) Dbl

[P_Marlowe]

we play X to be T/O, with tolerance for diamonds.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikestar13]

This needs to be penalty. What else can you do with a hand that can beat 2♥?

[rduran1216]

penalty.

absent an agreement, this SCREAMS penalty.

[OleBerg]

mikestar13, on 2010-November-03, 00:45, said:

This needs to be penalty. What else can you do with a hand that can beat 2♥?

Goes for any double in any sequence.

[Free]

I don't think there's a real standard, but I'd take it as takeout. If I pass and overcaller Doubles it would be takeout, so my Dbl must be takeout as well.

[P_Marlowe]

rduran1216, on 2010-November-03, 01:33, said:

penalty.

absent an agreement, this SCREAMS penalty.

Let it scream.

In the current situation, it does matter, if you happen to play ELC or not,
if you play ELC, you dont need to play T/O in the current situation, since
p would have been able to make a T/O with 5-6 diamonds and a 4 card spade suit.

But without ELC (or if one exchanges the 2D bid with a 2C bid) and in general:
I think the frequency for having 4 spades and diamond tolerance (including heart
shortage) is higher than having lots of hearts.

And 10HCP + 4 good hearts wont do the job, since p did only reopen.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rhm]

OleBerg, on 2010-November-03, 02:07, said:

Goes for any double in any sequence.

True, but the likelihood for holding a penalty double versus takeout varies with each sequence as do the relative benefits of those actions.
Here you have already refrained from making a takeout double over 1♥, neither did you over-call.
Your partner gave a clear preference for one suit in the balancing seat and limited his overall strength.

Assuming you neither want to make a penalty double nor a raise of partner's suit, which hand can you hold where you get the urge to double now competitively instead of simply passing? What are the benefits?
If partner has tolerance for the unbid suits he can reopen with a double, can't he?

However, with a ♥ stack over opener you can hold a pretty good hand. I know what I would like to do then and partner is not that likely to have enough to reopen with a double when I am strong.
This is not that unlikely given that both partner and opener's partner seem to have few cards in ♥ and are strictly limited.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

P_Marlowe, on 2010-November-03, 04:39, said:

Let it scream.

In the current situation, it does matter, if you happen to play ELC or not,
if you play ELC, you dont need to play T/O in the current situation, since
p would have been able to make a T/O with 5-6 diamonds and a 4 card spade suit.

But without ELC (or if one exchanges the 2D bid with a 2C bid) and in general:
I think the frequency for having 4 spades and diamond tolerance (including heart
shortage) is higher than having lots of hearts.

ELC may not be standard in second position, but a reopening double is much less strict on distribution than in second position. I do not know of any Bridge player who would over call in ♦ in the balancing position when holding a ♠ suit.

Quote

And 10HCP + 4 good hearts wont do the job, since p did only reopen.

Well if you have not enough to double you pass and wait whether partner can reopen again, this time with a double.

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

"Standard" often has a time lag. As with so many other doubles, this used to be penalty so that is probably still "standard". But in this case I think penalty makes a lot of sense. With five spades I would have overcalled 1♠, with clubs and diamond tolerance I can bid 3♣ now, so t/o would be a narrow set of hands, almost exactly 4225. I think I would like to play it as cooperative (typically 4234 with one diamond trick) rather than strict penalty.

I wouldn't be quite sure how I would interpret this playing with a random forum regular but my best guess would be penalty.

[OleBerg]

rhm, on 2010-November-03, 05:44, said:

True, but the likelihood for holding a penalty double versus takeout varies with each sequence as do the relative benefits of those actions.
Here you have already refrained from making a takeout double over 1♥, neither did you over-call.
Your partner gave a clear preference for one suit in the balancing seat and limited his overall strength.

Assuming you neither want to make a penalty double nor a raise of partner's suit, which hand can you hold where you get the urge to double now competitively instead of simply passing? What are the benefits?
If partner has tolerance for the unbid suits he can reopen with a double, can't he?

However, with a ♥ stack over opener you can hold a pretty good hand. I know what I would like to do then and partner is not that likely to have enough to reopen with a double when I am strong.
This is not that unlikely given that both partner and opener's partner seem to have few cards in ♥ and are strictly limited.

Rainer Herrmann

I haven't really considered what is best. This is a sequence where I let my partners decide.

I was simply commenting, that the argument could be aplied to any double in any sequence. (And therefore is nil.)

[cherdano]

Takeout double for me.

[mfa1010]

I play it as takeout, but "there is no standard" seems to be the right answer.

If partner had doubled instead of bidding 2♦, I play my X of 2♥ as penalty. My partner insists.

[dake50]

Takeout.
How else to suggest the other major and a bit of something.
Especially as I play a power double, many overcalls beg partner to show/suggest the other major.
However, I know this is new theory.
Old was an overcall is a 1-suited hand of bounded strength.
Little or no interest in other strains.
Raise if you can, 3NT if my suit is source of tricks plus your stop(s).

[gnasher]

Almost any hand that would want to make a takeout double here could bid 2♠ instead. That's an argument for playing double as penalty in this particular sequence.

However, I don't think I want to have to cope with the assymmetry of playing this one as penalties but

1♠ pass pass 2♦
2♠ dbl

as takeout.

[mtvesuvius]

I would treat this as penalty, however Andy's auction above I think I would play as penalty as well. A 3♣ call in the second auction seems like the "takeout double," and a 2♠ call in the first one is the same. I think that in this auction it is much likelier to have a penalty double (how else do you bid this hand now?) than to have a takeout double where bidding 2♠/3♣ would be a problem.

I'm sure standard is penalty, but I think that Standard is right for a change

[Bbradley62]

For those who say takeout, what strength range are you showing?

[peachy]

Logically, the doubler has some length in hearts and an opening hand with shape unsuited for takeout double. It could be all the way up to a trap pass with just pretty hearts, but does not have to be "just hearts". Strongly suggests defending 2HX. With shortness in hearts and enough now to make any noises voluntarily, there would have been a first round takeout double instead of Pass.

However, the question was What is expert standard? and that question I am probably not qualified to answer on two counts: I am a "mini expert" if even that although familiar with much of expert standard, and I don't know what the top expert opinion/practice is for this although I suspect it is Penalty/ish.

[Cascade]

Free, on 2010-November-03, 04:29, said:

If I pass and overcaller Doubles it would be takeout, so my Dbl must be takeout as well.

I don't think that argument is compelling.

Having passed with good hearts and partner protected once I can imagine a partnership wanting to play a penalty double rather than having to rely on partner to protect a second time. Nevertheless double in the protective seat would still be takeout.

[Rodney26]

gnasher, on 2010-November-03, 08:32, said:

Almost any hand that would want to make a takeout double here could bid 2♠ instead. That's an argument for playing double as penalty in this particular sequence.

However, I don't think I want to have to cope with the assymmetry of playing this one as penalties but

1♠ pass pass 2♦
2♠ dbl

as takeout.

I like these comments.

I think standard is clearly a penalty double, and that it is the correct agreement to have in an expert partnership. Opener could be stepping into a huge misfit opposite a worthless dummy. It seems flawed to expect partner to protect with a double in the balancing seat when partner didn't double the first time.