[straube]

unfav imps. Assuming dbl is takeout, which hand balances (if any)

edit: 1S P 2S P P ?

A xx Kxxx Kxx Axxx
B x Kxxx Kxxx Axxx
C x KT9x K98x Axxx
D other-you create
E Pass any hand not good enough to dbl the first time. This is imps!

[bluecalm]

And what is the bidding so far ?

[straube]

bluecalm, on 2011-March-07, 11:27, said:

And what is the bidding so far ?

LOL. I forgot to add that

1S P 2S P P ?

2S is a simple raise

[awm]

straube, on 2011-March-07, 11:16, said:

unfav imps. Assuming dbl is takeout, which hand balances (if any)

edit: 1S P 2S P P ?

A xx Kxxx Kxx Axxx
B x Kxxx Kxxx Axxx
C x KT9x K98x Axxx
D other-you create
E Pass any hand not good enough to dbl the first time. This is imps!

I would've doubled initially on hands B and C. It pays to get in early on this type of hand rather than late; I think B is a good example of a minimum double.

Given the scoring/vulnerability, I would not balance on hand A (although at NV it's certainly a prototypical balancing double).

The hand type where would most frequently balance here is probably a decent 3451-type. This is hard to show in direct position (not playing equal level correction) but fairly safe to double on here. Double-then-correct cannot be a strong one-suiter, because that hand would've acted over 1♠.

[straube]

awm, on 2011-March-07, 11:51, said:

I would've doubled initially on hands B and C. It pays to get in early on this type of hand rather than late; I think B is a good example of a minimum double.

Given the scoring/vulnerability, I would not balance on hand A (although at NV it's certainly a prototypical balancing double).

The hand type where would most frequently balance here is probably a decent 3451-type. This is hard to show in direct position (not playing equal level correction) but fairly safe to double on here. Double-then-correct cannot be a strong one-suiter, because that hand would've acted over 1♠.

Would you go so far as to say partner should expect an equal level conversion hand after hearing the double? For instance, with a decent 3-4-5-1, I dbl and partner bids 3C and should I pass expecting 6 clubs? Or can I have a 4441 that wasn't strong enough to double 1S?

[bluecalm]

I have no idea. Some good players I know insist on playing dbl as showing at least 5-4 here on the argument that no normal t/o hand is good enough if it didn't double before.
On the other hand partner can easily have:
xxx xx AQxxx QJx or:
xxxx QJxx AQJTx x

and we have our +110/140/170 take. On the other hand:
KJ3 QJ3 T832 QT7 and it will be 200 or 500/800 if one of them can double.
We need a parlay here to win imps:
-they have exactly 8 tricks in spades (most of the time they have 9 they will be able to bid 3S or double us)
-we are making 9+ tricks somewhere

If we are correct we win 6imps. If we often break even but also could lose 5imps (neither side makes anything) or 11+ imps (they get us). It's difficult to say what are exact probabilities but my intuition enhanced by some simulations is that pass is a winner.

[bluecalm]

Quote

I would've doubled initially on hands B and C. It pays to get in early on this type of hand rather than late; I think B is a good example of a minimum double.

I would love to play this style but it requires a lot of partnership understanding imo.

[akhare]

I am with the others on this one.

Basically, a preemptive strike with B/C is best instead of trying to guess later. True, it's a point or two lighter than what pard might expect, but it's vastly better than coming in over 2♠ and at least one of the Ks in the AKK ranks to be well placed.

The other alternative is to simply P and continue to hold your silence assuming they raise to 2♠.

IMO, either option ranks to be better than coming in late at that vul...

[mtvesuvius]

I double quite aggressively in direct* seat, partially because my judgement on balancing is so bad.

I'll attempt to show how bad I am at judging balancing by passing now on all of these. Like AWM said, 3451 is possible, as is 1435 with a 9 count or so. With hands B and C I would have doubled immediately.

I haven't gotten too many bad results doubling aggressively here, but partner certainly needs to be in on the joke.

[straube]

akhare, on 2011-March-07, 12:14, said:

I am with the others on this one.

Basically, a preemptive strike with B/C is best instead of trying to guess later. True, it's a point or two lighter than what pard might expect, but it's vastly better than coming in over 2♠ and at least one of the Ks in the AKK ranks to be well placed.

The other alternative is to simply P and continue to hold your silence assuming they raise to 2♠.

IMO, either option ranks to be better than coming in late at that vul...

I agree, but I'm starting to think that pass and dbl ought to show equal level conversion when vulnerable but possibly a 1444 when nv. Why the distinction? Because when vulnerable, partner's 3C bid ought to be a strong preference for clubs. When nv, partner's 3C bid is just a simple preference.

Do I have that right, awm?

[Phil]

Didn't think people balanced any more in this auction

[nigel_k]

I would balance on 2 and 3 though I agree they are enough for an initial double.

Regarding the ELC issue, we have both double and 2NT available so just need to divide the possible hands between those two calls. Partner is unlikely to pass the double when we have a singleton and will almost never pass when we have more than one, so that isn't really a consideration.

I think double then pull 3♣ to 3♦ shows better hearts and 2NT first instead of double shows better diamonds. The main issue is the heart/club hands: whether you double or bid 2NT or may do either, and what partner is supposed to do with diamonds when preferring clubs to hearts. I doubt there is any standard or logical answer to this. You need an agreement.

[CSGibson]

I would have doubled initially on 2 & 3 with partner an unpassed hand, and on all three if partner was a passed hand, just to avoid this decision. I would balance on all 3 not having made an initial X (especially if I had the agreement with partner that 2N after the balancing double is 2 places to play).

[straube]

CSGibson, on 2011-March-07, 15:36, said:

I would have doubled initially on 2 & 3 with partner an unpassed hand, and on all three if partner was a passed hand, just to avoid this decision. I would balance on all 3 not having made an initial X (especially if I had the agreement with partner that 2N after the balancing double is 2 places to play).

We have that agreement.

I understand about bidding to avoid a later decision, but it looks like you're willing to double back in with a hand that didn't meet your initial dbl standard. I feel less bad now.

My hand was #2 and I caught partner with some drek like KJTx xxx Jxx Qxx. Bad partner! Though he did scramble for -800.

Still wondering if vul should promise the ELC hand while nv should not promise that. I suppose it's a matter for partnership agreement.

[CSGibson]

straube, on 2011-March-07, 16:06, said:

We have that agreement.

I understand about bidding to avoid a later decision, but it looks like you're willing to double back in with a hand that didn't meet your initial dbl standard. I feel less bad now.

My hand was #2 and I caught partner with some drek like KJTx xxx Jxx Qxx. Bad partner! Though he did scramble for -800.

Still wondering if vul should promise the ELC hand while nv should not promise that. I suppose it's a matter for partnership agreement.

Partner has to pass with that hand IMO. Your chances of beating the hand are better than your chances of scrambling intelligently.

[mike777]

pass and pass.

as a non expert.

interesting thread

[jogs]

awm, on 2011-March-07, 11:51, said:

I would've doubled initially on hands B and C. It pays to get in early on this type of hand rather than late; I think B is a good example of a minimum double.

I doubled with x Kxxx Kxxx Kxxx. The auction went
1S - X - p - 3H, p - 4H.
4H could only be beat by expert defense. RHO was not up to it. Partner was surprised I bid 4H. I said either you have the aces or RHO has the aces. Since LHO has nothing on this auction.

[straube]

CSGibson, on 2011-March-07, 16:34, said:

Partner has to pass with that hand IMO. Your chances of beating the hand are better than your chances of scrambling intelligently.

I agree though we're not beating it on this particular hand. He chose 3C and I'm glad I didn't have a 1-4-5-3 pattern. Gets to my point about whether my dbl should show 4H/5D when vulnerable. He played it very well to hold it to down 3.

[whereagles]

hand A and x Qxxx Kxxx Axxx are pass + dbl later. Others are 1st round dbls to me.

[Fluffy]

I'd pass and then double with all three, don't feel very confident on the first one and maybe I would just pass. Who doubles partscores at IMPs anyway?