[ochinko]

What do you think is the minimum hand for a takeout double over a weak two opening in a major suit if you are in 2nd position? Should the requirements be the same as over 1M or different and why? On the one hand the opener is weaker. On the other hand we start our bidding one level higher.

After playing with some examples I reached the following conclusion which seems to me to be equally aplicable to 1M and 2M openings.

We assume that we have no points in the bid major, and that we have 4/5 cards in the unbid major or 3 cards but with at least 2 of the 3 top high cards in it, and no wasted values. We use the term "delta" coined by Jean-Rene Vernes, the founder of the LTT. Delta would be the difference in length between the unbid and the bid major. We add the delta to the HCP, and decide to double when the end product is at least 13 NV over hearts, or 16 vuln. over spades (The level seems to me to have a higher priority than the vulnerability):

               We are
Opps bid    NV     Vuln
 Hearts      13      14
 Spades      15      16

Using this formula we can now construct example hands eligible for a double NV over 1/2H:
Jxxxx - Axxx Kxxx
Qxxxx x Axx Kxxx
QJxx xx Kxxx AJx
KQx xxx KQx QJxx
AQx xxxx Kxx AJx We'd have to double even with a negative delta, I guess.

Or vulnerable over 1/2Sp:
- KJxxx Axxx Kxxx
x QJxxx AJx KJxx
xx AQxx Kxxx AJx
xxx KQx AQx KQxx
xxxx AKx KJx AQx

Do you think this is correct? If it is, is it useful or too complicated? Are HCP enough to decide, or are Zar/LTC better?

[Flame]

Well i didnt really understand your math (didnt try too much), i dont agree that double of 1M require the same as double of 2M. Double of 2M require little more, maybe 1.5-2 hcp more or something like that. on the other hand double of 2M can be little more flexible with the shape.
The examples over 1h/2h seems to me a bit too weak against 2h (atleast some of them) those over 2sp look just fine even over 2sp.

[whereagles]

To me, the requirements to double/overcall a weak 2 are just about the same as as vs a 1-level opener. I would double 2H on KJxx x Axxx QTxx.

[junyi_zhu]

whereagles, on Sep 21 2004, 05:06 PM, said:

To me, the requirements to double/overcall a weak 2 are just about the same as as vs a 1-level opener. I would double 2H on KJxx x Axxx QTxx.

so you'll probably play many 22 HCP 3NT without souce of tricks. good luck!

[EricK]

Probably the most important difference between 1M and 2M is that opener's partner is in a much better position to punish you if you are wrong to compete.

Over 2M, the third hand will generally have some idea of where the hand should be played (usually in the major) and at what level. So if you compete and are wrong, you will get doubled.

If the opening is 1M, 3rd hand is in a more awkward postion. It will often not be clear where the best place to play the hand is, nor the correct level. So he must put more effort into constructive bidding and less into trying to penalise you. This means that a lot of the time you can get away with competing over 1M even when it is theoretically wrong.

Eric

[BrianEDuran]

Ochinko

I think you have an interesting idea of coming up for a rule for a direct seat double. I especially think this would be useful over 2 and 3 level preempts. Some partnerships are very rule oriented, while some have general understandings. I think a major consideration of the usefullness if what type of partnerships do you have, since rules work best when you are both on the same page.

As for you specific rule set, I like the idea of the "delta" Its a very useful figure of merit for doubles. But often when having a void int he opponents suit, it seems that you weighing is too much. Lets take, Jxxx, ---, AJxx, Kxxxx, NV, you would double with. I just don't see my partner making the right decission after (2H)-X-(4H).

Here are some things I would consider when coming up with a rule for direct seat doubles.

You definetly need a diffent rule for a direct seat double at different levels.

Consider what types of hands your partner is going to balance on. I'm a big fan of agressive balancing, this mean lighter hand don't need to take an action. If you figure out how agressively you are going to balance, you can figure out how sound your direct seat bids will need to bid.

Think about when partner might pass for a take out, or what partner might expect in the bidding gets high. How many tricks to they think you hand will provide? This goes back to LTC, which you mention. A ace and king might not be enough.

Good Luck
Brian

[whereagles]

junyi_zhu, on Sep 21 2004, 07:44 PM, said:

whereagles, on Sep 21 2004, 05:06 PM, said:

To me, the requirements to double/overcall a weak 2 are just about the same as as vs a 1-level opener. I would double 2H on KJxx x Axxx QTxx.

so you'll probably play many 22 HCP 3NT without souce of tricks. good luck!

Well, 22 hcp is usually enough, with the 3 more I add for fine card play

[EricK]

whereagles, on Sep 21 2004, 09:04 PM, said:

junyi_zhu, on Sep 21 2004, 07:44 PM, said:

whereagles, on Sep 21 2004, 05:06 PM, said:

To me, the requirements to double/overcall a weak 2 are just about the same as as vs a 1-level opener. I would double 2H on KJxx x Axxx QTxx.

so you'll probably play many 22 HCP 3NT without souce of tricks. good luck!

Well, 22 hcp is usually enough, with the 3 more I add for fine card play

In the old days, 26 was considered to be the amount you needed for 3NT. It was only when experts started adding points for their own play, that it got lowered to 25.

Eric

[Free]

HCP is not the way to measure how high you can go, it's all about distribution. Take an average 22HCP and you'll be losing lots! HCP is just a help, but there it ends. Real handevaluation doesn't need no stinking points, it needs tricks or losers.

Seems like 3NT in the old days needed 26HCP. Now beginners are thought you need 25. Advanced players usually get in 3NT with 24HCP these days, and if you play imps, you'll certainly bid these games with 23.
If you ask me, 22 on average is WAY too few to be in 3NT, you need at least a 5 card or a 6 card, or all the luck in the world to make your contract.

[Fluffy]

To double a weak 2 IMO you need about 16 HCP, may be a bit less when the shape is good, 14 should be enough when you have 3 suiter.

[whereagles]

Free, on Sep 22 2004, 09:12 AM, said:

If you ask me, 22 on average is WAY too few to be in 3NT, you need at least a 5 card or a 6 card, or all the luck in the world to make your contract.

Hey, just because one doubles on a shapely 10-count, doesn't necessarily mean he's going to play 3NT

[ochinko]

Fluffy, on Sep 22 2004, 05:00 AM, said:

To double a weak 2 IMO you need about 16 HCP, may be a bit less when the shape is good, 14 should be enough when you have 3 suiter.

If we double 1M with 13; 2M with 16 then interpolating we'll have to double 3M with what, 19 HCP and no less? I am not sure whether this would be right.

Thanks to all that answered, and espessially Brian for his encouragement, but Brian, 3-suiter hands are too powerful to pass them. I'd still double 2H with Jxxx - AJxx Kxxxx when NV. This is a 26 Zar pts hand. You can't shift those desicions to the balancing partner.

While experts have many years of experience which allow them to assess their hand non-experts like me frequently prefer rules to help them make a choice even if it wouldn't be 100% right.

[junyi_zhu]

ochinko, on Sep 22 2004, 03:04 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Sep 22 2004, 05:00 AM, said:

To double a weak 2 IMO you need about 16 HCP, may be a bit less when the shape is good, 14 should be enough when you have 3 suiter.

If we double 1M with 13; 2M with 16 then interpolating we'll have to double 3M with what, 19 HCP and no less? I am not sure whether this would be right.

Thanks to all that answered, and espessially Brian for his encouragement, but Brian, 3-suiter hands are too powerful to pass them. I'd still double 2H with Jxxx - AJxx Kxxxx when NV. This is a 26 Zar pts hand. You can't shift those desicions to the balancing partner.

While experts have many years of experience which allow them to assess their hand non-experts like me frequently prefer rules to help them make a choice even if it wouldn't be 100% right.

The basic idea is that you don't often have a fit if you double. So you gotta give yourself some "insurance" at two or three level. If you always double with such a nine, what would your poor partner bid without fit and only 9 HCP? If you double 2M with at least good 13, your partner would know your side has the balance of the HCP, thus defence can be right, so he'd probably pass your double over 2H
with SAxx HKQT9 Dxxx Cxxx, now he found you had this stinky 9, and 2H double +1, whose fault is it? You may argue that partner should bid something instead of
passing, well, what can he bid then? 2S? which might get doubled and down 2 or may hear a raise to 4S from you when 3NT is icecold, 3C or 3D? give me a break. 2NT? most play it as leb now. 3NT? congratualtions, now you guys have to play 18 HCP 3NTs:) HCP might not be a good tool to evaluate your hand. However, in my humble opinion, ZAR point is even worse. The basic goal of ZAR is to never miss a game. This is horrible and against the balance of bridge. If you never miss a game, you'd play a lot of !% winning chance games, and you will be proved as a loser in a long run. The last advice is that forget about those rules and try to use your own judgement and evaluation. Those point counting system is just like training wheel for kids who started learning bike. They may have a pretty good start and fall down way less often than those who don't use them, but those who don't use them would have a much solid understanding and skill, because they have to learn from their mistakes.