[Scoti]

Is anyone else playing a minimum value take out double? Perhaps it is being called something else. I've been playing it with phenominal success until today, the first disaster. But that later.

The idea being that after a weak looking opening by ops such as 1!d, P, 1!h the fourth seat dbl to show 10+. The distinguishing feature from usual T/O being only that P need only call long suit, which will be given to him to play in. This results in some Very good imp scores for making 2 bid since few open it lacking "opsning values" in either hand. Or else the ops really do have the stuff needed and overcall P's bid. But even then the Dbl serves to help limit ops from game, having showed points that may reflect normal T/O opening values, as far as they know. It has already prevented Ops from playing at One, where they are likely as good as anything, lacking Game values, and drives them upward where Set may be more than a dream. And if we go down one Decalring at 2 level, its still better than letting Ops have their way.

All P must do to make it work is call long suit. Unfortunately today (new) P called a dark suit, interpretting it as Neg X (reasonable indeed, since i was not profiling dbl's) and holding only 3 clubs to my two. He did hold 6 !d himself however. lol. Which is what I expected his clubs to look like after his bid. So we went for 2c, not overcalled. I've Made two with 6 cards before, but 5 trumps is a little hard on P's, as well as ones image as moderately uncrazy bidder. We did not get Dbl for Penalty (no one ever does, of course). But it was still unpleasant. Tho P was kind and explained Neg Dbl theory to me; that is starts with not wanting to play in the suits already bid. }8-< Ok, neat, ive heard that somewhere . . .

Comments on the concept, anyone else playing with wonderful success, etc. Whatever. 4th seat is basically declaring to have 1NT fit without the hcp, in my conception of it. (And good shot at a 2 level Make.) IE willing to play it in any suit p calls. P must only realize that it will be the suit he bids unless OC.

[manudude03]

Sorry if I seem rather closed-minded, but I fail to see the advantage over regular takeout doubles. It might work if partner is the type to pass 1D with AKJ9x xxx xx xxx (and I know a lot of people at club level who do). However, playing this way seems to lose a lot of 4-4 fits when you need to, something which happens a lot more often than a 5-3 or 6-2 fit you would not have found otherwise.

[gwnn]

well I double for takeout with a lot of your hands but I also promise about 11+ balanced and 3+ cards in majors and 2+ in minors. it works - in my experience, ymmv

[Scoti]

manudude03, on 2011-January-02, 15:20, said:

Sorry if I seem rather closed-minded, but I fail to see the advantage over regular takeout doubles. It might work if partner is the type to pass 1D with AKJ9x xxx xx xxx (and I know a lot of people at club level who do). However, playing this way seems to lose a lot of 4-4 fits when you need to, something which happens a lot more often than a 5-3 or 6-2 fit you would not have found otherwise.

I think you are right, there is not advantage Over normal takeout, if we had to replace that with it. The advantage of having it in addition is being able to get into the auction rather than giving it to ops at 1 level where they can not help but Make. It does not take the place of the traditional T/O. Indeed playing the standard takeout is part of what helps it to work, since takeout then becomes 10+ not 12 or 13+. It need not be carded distinctly and creates a certain ambiguity there. And as mentioned, the 2 level Make can score very well in IMP. Usually at least 4, sometimes 6-8. This has helped immensely toward several tournament scores, and a close match.

It trys to win the contact in hands where hcp are near even between the sides. (Tho it is possible to Make 2 with under 20 of course) Or force the overly ambitious to 3. One may sometimes steal the contract due to vulnerability or unwillingness to go to a major or to 3 level by the other side.

It seemed very safe to me also until today, albeit one sided, with dbl er knowing the pts and simply stops bidding at 2.

GWNN Thx for the info. That seems logical and perhaps a good addition for me, knowing P will choose a major if he is 4-4 or perhaps even 4-5 with a minor. so for me to hold at least 3 in majors increasese safety. I too had 11 hcp today.

[mgoetze]

I have no idea what you are saying - is it that you are doubling with random crap regardless of shape, as long as you have 10 HCP? E.g. you will double (1♦)-p-(1♥) with x KJxx QJxx Kxxx?

[Scoti]

I'm sorry, my German is insufficient to explain this.

[Scoti]

Thank you for your opinion and fine offer. Will you include more naughty words, so I too may try to shock and impress the masses with juvenile lexicon whilst trolling the bridge forums, spouting meaningless unconstructive comments about posts I did not really bother to read well?

[mgoetze]

Naughty words such as "mildly deficient"? Sure, but it'll cost extra.

FWIW, I meant my first post to be mildly constructive by inviting you to clarify what you are trying to say. I will now further and very constructively suggest that, if you really wish to impress the masses, you ought to try to present some actual bridge content in a form which people can understand easily, rather than "trolling the bridge forums".

[Free]

Scoti, on 2011-January-02, 14:49, said:

But even then the Dbl serves to help limit ops from game, having showed points that may reflect normal T/O opening values, as far as they know.

So you're saying you don't disclose this special agreement to your opps? You're a cheat!

[Gerben42]

First, please refrain from personal attacks on this forum. No need for any of this.

Second, the convention "minimum off-shape T/O double" is quite rare, no pick-up partner would ever understand it like this. My suggestion is to not double 1♦ pass 1♥ with a doubleton ♣ unless you have agreed that this is okay.

And if you agreed this convention with your partner, get rid of it asap. It doesn't work.

[mikeh]

Scoti, you are relatively new here and haven't posted much, and it is clear that your English is not good...tho infinitely better than my German...it is brave of you to post in a language with which you struggle.

The unfortunate result of the language issue is that it is not easy for most of us (well, not for me, anyway) to understand exactly what you are suggesting.

If I understand you correctly, you are playing a method in which 4th seat, after the bidding (1x) P (1y) will double on almost all hands with 10 hcp.

As others have pointed out, this is not a common approach. Nor, in my view, is it ever likely to become common for the simple reason that it seems like a very, very bad idea.

I don't think that you are a cheat if you play this and don't annouce it, but I am sure that, if you played this in a tournament and the opponents found out what you were doing, you'd be in trouble. This treatment of 'double' is very unusual. The opps are entitled to know about your unsual methods, and the fact that you don't know how unusual this treatment is, is no excuse.

Some of your arguments make no sense. You talk about keeping the opps out of the one-level...well, my experience is that the opps generally do that themselves... the only real exception being if they are about to play 1N, in which case you can always choose to balance later if your hand is unsuitable for immediate action.

You talk about keeping opps from bidding a game...but good opps, even if they don't know about your weird approach, will bid their games based on their hands, not your bidding. They may end up 'misplaying' it because they will play you to have a normal takeout double...but after this happens a few times, someone will catch onto what you are doing and you'll be in trouble with the Directors. Meanwhile, the gains you pick up on this will be undeserved...you aren't cheating but you aren't playing by the rules either...the only reason you're not cheating is that you don't appear to know that you are breaking the rules....not the 'rules' about doubles, but the rules about disclosing your agreements to the opps.

I could go on at length about why these doubles seem like a bad, bad bridge idea, but I frankly can't be bothered. Start playing against good players, and disclosing your agreements, and I think you'll find that your results will become a LOT worse than you have so far experienced.

In addition, people who play weird agreements tend to focus on the good results they get when the 'right' hand comes up and tend to not even think about the impact of their gadget on normal hands. Thus, when you have a normal takeout double, your partner has to cater to you holding your random double, thus making partner's job virtually impossible if he has a decent hand.

[babalu1997]

Scoti, on 2011-January-02, 14:49, said:

The idea being that after a weak looking opening by ops such as 1!d, P, 1!h the fourth seat dbl to show 10+.

You are welcome to play that way
i play weak no trumps

so 1♦or 1♣, the weakling deny weak no trumps

i laugh when i double you all for penalty opposite 4 hcp from partner

[Scoti]

Babalu ... you are dreaming. Since you have no way to know my p has 4 or not 12. And if you happen to have enough hcp to set us for 2d-1 for instance, then its me who gets to laugh at the Game contract you missed.

[Scoti]

Thank you all for your replies. As mentioned, with me being a newer forum poster, It has really helped me to sort out who is who here. There seem to be a lack of good Chess players, I note, who always think ahead. Thats my other game btw. But anyway, it has been enjoyable. Now it gets more enjoyable as it seems I forgot to mention, that this concept was not exactly my own idea. I'm afraid that honor goes to Eddie Kantar.

And he plays it with 8hcp, rather than my 9. But I guess he's a bit better player too, eh? So we'll give him that, ok? Except you knowlegable nay sayers of course ... I expect you will be wanting to take the matter up with him now, and help set him straight on the foolishness of this idea. I'm sure he'll be pleased to learn from you. lol.

For anyone reading conscienciously, rather than playing troll the new guy ( or playing "be duped into looking seriously foolish", by the new guy, as the case may be) I'll add this: If you actually get the contract for 2 then expect hcp's to be fairly evenly divided and having 18 to 21 in which case your Make will gather 4 to 6.5 imp most often, tho Ive seen it go to 7 before. The less hcp, the more imp basically..

However, personally I find the defensive value very attractive, since that is my personal forte'. The dbl helps be rid of indefensible 1-level contracts (I never willingly let ops play for ONE, unless its because they should have bid Game)and pushes ops up. If they go to a 3 level contract of course, its likely to be set if hcps divide as mentioned. Even if not, then they may have had to shift to a lesser suit. This is particularly valuable in matchpoint for getting ops off of 1NT contracts and into suit. As often as not, naturally, to a minor.

It has proven to be one of the most valuable defensive tools in the arsenal, and a definate factor in reaching +26/-4 in BBO Expert matches. Best wishes to those of you who wish to try it. And Thank You to those who don't.

[manudude03]

Scoti, on 2011-August-05, 06:01, said:

Thank you all for your replies. As mentioned, with me being a newer forum poster, It has really helped me to sort out who is who here. There seem to be a lack of good Chess players, I note, who always think ahead. Thats my other game btw. But anyway, it has been enjoyable. Now it gets more enjoyable as it seems I forgot to mention, that this concept was not exactly my own idea. I'm afraid that honor goes to Eddie Kantar.

And he plays it with 8hcp, rather than my 9. But I guess he's a bit better player too, eh? So we'll give him that, ok? Except you knowlegable nay sayers of course ... I expect you will be wanting to take the matter up with him now, and help set him straight on the foolishness of this idea. I'm sure he'll be pleased to learn from you. lol.

For anyone reading conscienciously, rather than playing troll the new guy ( or playing "be duped into looking seriously foolish", by the new guy, as the case may be) I'll add this: If you actually get the contract for 2 then expect hcp's to be fairly evenly divided and having 18 to 21 in which case your Make will gather 4 to 6.5 imp most often, tho Ive seen it go to 7 before. The less hcp, the more imp basically..

However, personally I find the defensive value very attractive, since that is my personal forte'. The dbl helps be rid of indefensible 1-level contracts (I never willingly let ops play for ONE, unless its because they should have bid Game)and pushes ops up. If they go to a 3 level contract of course, its likely to be set if hcps divide as mentioned. Even if not, then they may have had to shift to a lesser suit. This is particularly valuable in matchpoint for getting ops off of 1NT contracts and into suit. As often as not, naturally, to a minor.

It has proven to be one of the most valuable defensive tools in the arsenal, and a definate factor in reaching +26/-4 in BBO Expert matches. Best wishes to those of you who wish to try it. And Thank You to those who don't.

I just have 2 questions/comments:
1. Did you fully disclose the unusual nature of your doubles? If not, then you are misleading your opps.
2. Do you happen to know the people you were playing against? When I say "know", I mean had a few bridge conversations, have an idea of their real life achievements etc. My department of made up statistics tells me 45% of BBO users are self-rated expert and 70% of those are novices.