[kgr]

http://www.pitbulls.shawbiz.ca/
See DSIP Course

D.S.I.P.:"Do something intelligent partner"-double
=> Basically these DBL's say that you have extra quick tricks outside opps suit(s). Instead of bidding higher, it invites partner to bid higher, but gives him the chance to pass if he has too much value in their suit.
- I'm not sure if this is really new and much different then take-out DBL's.
- It is more a set of articles and not really one document. This make it a bit difficult to study it. (eg: one time they say that you can only give one DSIP DBL, and later they give an example with a bidding with 2 DSIP DBLs in it)
Q: Has anyone read this and thinks it is useful?

[mikeh]

kgr, on 2010-December-20, 17:21, said:

http://www.pitbulls.shawbiz.ca/
See DSIP Course

D.S.I.P.:"Do something intelligent partner"-double
=> Basically these DBL's say that you have extra quick tricks outside opps suit(s). Instead of bidding higher, it invites partner to bid higher, but gives him the chance to pass if he has too much value in their suit.
- I'm not sure if this is really new and much different then take-out DBL's.
- It is more a set of articles and not really one document. This make it a bit difficult to study it. (eg: one time they say that you can only give one DSIP DBL, and later they give an example with a bidding with 2 DSIP DBLs in it)
Q: Has anyone read this and thinks it is useful?

I haven't read it, tho I looked at the site...the list of articles is way too long for me to want to read through.

The author, Crosby, is a long-time Alberta (Canada) player and was a leading player in Western Canada in the 1970s.... before we got our own team trials, our main chance to compete for the right to play internationally was through the Grand National Teams and Bob was on a team that, if memory serves, reached the final 6 playdowns....as in the top 6 teams in NA. I think they did this at least twice. Bob continued to play thereafter and was (and stil is as far as I know) a student of the game. His website was created primarily to assist a group of Albertan women improve their game. One of his 'pitbulls' was, I think, Kiz Fung, who in Philadelphia won silver in two...two world events...the mixed pairs and the womens' pairs! The latter was with another Alberta player, Susan Culham. Bob was the NPC on their CWTC winning team in 2002.

Now I know Kiz has been working hard at her game more recently than Bob's website:) But it still must have made Bob feel proud:)

As for the ideas, based on your post, this is merely a version of 'action' doubles as played these days by virtually all top pairs. I don't know who coined the term 'do something intelligent partner', but I do know that Gord McOrmond and I used that term in these circumstances in the late 1990s, including times we played against Bob....but I stress, I don't think we 'invented' or 'reinvented' the term...I think we heard it somewhere else first.

[dake50]

The basic idea is to use DSIP to "catch-up" the DT after an overcall or TO/X.
This widens the overcall range.
Else you must limit overcalls to 10-14, 5-suit.
And put the over-range into TO/X first.

I like to get the suit in quickly --
often a raise makes no need to top out.
That leaves DSIP for top-outs.

[kgr]

Basically these DBL's say that you have extra quick tricks outside opps suit(s). Instead of bidding higher, it invites partner to bid higher, but gives him the chance to pass if he has too much value in their suit. It is only valid if the situation is not a forcing pass. DSIP DBL's are valid by both partners
I have some questions about this::
I now play what we call Absolute DBL's on Game level. They also invite partner to bid higher, but we always play them (independently of a forcing pass or not) and only the first hand can make a Absolute DBL. In balancing seat it is a Penalty DBL.
Questions:
- Would it make sense to use DSIP DBL's also in case of a forcing pass? (Maybe you should switch to penalty in the balancing seat then?)
- Do you think it is best to have on Game Level the DSIP DBL's by both hands or to have DSIP DBL only by direct hand and penalty in balancing?
- (certainly on lower levels,) DSIP DBL's should only be done when you have more done expected quick tricks (K, A) outside their suit. More then expected HCP is not enough. Is that also the same for Action DBL's?

[dake50]

To kgr,

- Would it make sense to use DSIP DBL's also in case of a forcing pass? (Maybe you should switch to penalty in the balancing seat then?)
::: DSIP when forcing pass not ON.
Intend to partition DT vs. offense.


- Do you think it is best to have on Game Level the DSIP DBL's by both hands or to have DSIP DBL only by direct hand and penalty in balancing?
::: DSIP in balancing must lean to penalties.
Else why did partner choose his 'up-to-you' call?
He didn't act so your suggestion is likely final.

[kgr]

Dake50,
Have you read the articles about D.S.I.P. Doubles or are you one of the authors?
(Below comments are not meant to say that you are wrong. I try to better understand DSIP and see what would be useful - and better defene our absolute DBL's that are in fact DSIP DBL's on game level - , but I need to be able to discuss some things then )

dake50, on 2010-December-21, 07:39, said:

- Do you think it is best to have on Game Level the DSIP DBL's by both hands or to have DSIP DBL only by direct hand and penalty in balancing?
::: DSIP in balancing must lean to penalties.
Else why did partner choose his 'up-to-you' call?
He didn't act so your suggestion is likely final.

This is not how it is in the DSIP articles. I think that according to the articles both DBL's are DSIP?:
1S-(4H)-4S-(5H)-DBL and 1S-(4H)-4S-(5H)-Pass-(Pass)-DBL
And it is also possible that your partner does not have the defense, but missed the extra Quick tricks for the DSIP DBL?
In 1S-(4H)-4S-(5H)-Pass-(Pass)-DBL it is still possible that partner has a minimum hand with not enough for a DSIP DBL <or> that he has a good defensive hand. You want to save, but you first verify that partner did not have the defensive hand.

dake50, on 2010-December-21, 07:39, said:

- Would it make sense to use DSIP DBL's also in case of a forcing pass? (Maybe you should switch to penalty in the balancing seat then?)
::: DSIP when forcing pass not ON.
Intend to partition DT vs. offense.

If you were 'right' in your previous answer that the balancing DBL on Game level is penalty then you can use that as well in the forcing pass situation? When you are in a forcing pass in first hand (not balancing) then it doesn't really matter if you play?:
A ) Standard forcing pass
DBL: penalty, no extra offense
Pass: some extra offense, interested to bid on
Bid: good offense
DBL.....Bid: slam interest
or;
B ) DSIP in forcing pass situation
DBL: some extra offense, interested to bid on
Pass: no extra offense, want to defense
Bid: good offense
Pass.....Bid: slam interest

Thanks,
Koen