[kayin801]

---

Your double of 2♦ would have been takeout. What is the worst hand you need to double here, presumably for penalties? Please comment on format or vulnerabilities if possible.

[mr1303]

What does 1NT mean? That makes quite a lot of difference.

[kayin801]

Since I posted no alert and since I posted this in the expert forum I assumed you would assume it was a strong NT overcall.

[ahydra]

I'll play partner for about 2.5-3 defensive tricks (assuming this is a natural 1NT overcall), so I'll need at least 4 trumps to go with some more defence... perhaps AJxx xxx Qxxx xx at MPs? At imps I think I'd need a bit more, say AJ10x Qxx QJxx xx. But this is getting way into "just how many points are there in this deck" territory...

ahydra

[phil_20686]

I don't think you need that much. Especially if you have strong diamonds. I would consider doubling with xxx spades and AQTx diamonds. With a fourth small spade or JTx spade I would definitely double. Having the diamonds locked up is extremely important when defending these hands imo.

[MrAce]

phil_20686, on 2012-September-10, 07:59, said:

I don't think you need that much. Especially if you have strong diamonds. I would consider doubling with xxx spades and AQTx diamonds. With a fourth small spade or JTx spade I would definitely double. Having the diamonds locked up is extremely important when defending these hands imo.

But...but...we are not doubling 3NT! We are doubling a suit contract ! At 2 level ! What does locking ♦ suit has anything to do with this ? If you have AQTx ♦(you said it), and pd probably has K since he bid 1NT natural, that means RHO has tons of ♦ starting with J and LHO is void in ♦, here goes our 9 hcps into trash in defense! Which means 1♦ opener has working cards for his pd rather than wasted ♦ hcps even if he holds the K.

To be honest i am having hard time to find a hand. After all i did not overcall 1♠ over 1♦, i did not do anything after pd bid 1NT, and now i suddenly found something in my hand that makes me think our side can take 6 tricks confidently ?

[PhilKing]

Almost never doubling here.

Name a hand that passes 2 Diamonds, doubles 2 Spades (for penalties) and is remotely likely.

[phil_20686]

MrAce, on 2012-September-10, 16:57, said:

But...but...we are not doubling 3NT! We are doubling a suit contract ! At 2 level ! What does locking ♦ suit has anything to do with this ? If you have AQTx ♦(you said it), and pd probably has K since he bid 1NT natural, that means RHO has tons of ♦ starting with J and LHO is void in ♦, here goes our 9 hcps into trash in defense! Which means 1♦ opener has working cards for his pd rather than wasted ♦ hcps even if he holds the K.

To be honest i am having hard time to find a hand. After all i did not overcall 1♠ over 1♦, i did not do anything after pd bid 1NT, and now i suddenly found something in my hand that makes me think our side can take 6 tricks confidently ?

I find it very implausible that rho rebid 2d over 1N with a J high suit. That is why AQTx diamonds is so good here. rho will always have KJ and lho will normally be void. So they often just struggle to have any tricks. Partner will normally have spades over declarer, partner will usually have three spades or four, since he did not dble, and does not have too many diamonds. It all adds up to layouts where the opposition just struggle to make any tricks, say

---

and if you give south another card, it basically has to come out of wests spade suit, which just gives us more tricks.

[MrAce]

phil_20686, on 2012-September-10, 17:08, said:

I find it very implausible that rho rebid 2d over 1N with a J high suit. That is why AQTx diamonds is so good here. rho will always have KJ and lho will normally be void. So they often just struggle to have any tricks. Partner will normally have spades over declarer, partner will usually have three spades or four, since he did not dble, and does not have too many diamonds. It all adds up to layouts where the opposition just struggle to make any tricks, say

---

and if you give south another card, it basically has to come out of wests spade suit, which just gives us more tricks.

I agree that i would also bid 1NT with N hand in your example, but i am not sure about East not bidding a 7 card suit headed by J. But lets agree that he has the ♦ K. In your example we can defeat, and i knew that there are hands we can defeat. Not sure if this is a good reason to make a double though.

Keeping your hand as the way you picked, try defeating this

Pd has KJT AQxx Jxx KQx and dummy has x KTx Kxxxxx AJx , you can defeat if pd knows to lead heart ace and another. Or try this

Pd has ATx AQJx Jxx KQx , defense is hopeless.

But my point was when i wrote the previous post, i just cant really think of a hand that really worths making a penalty DBL at 2 level major contract AFTER passing over 1♦ and passing over pds 1NT overcall on 2nd turn. My point was not "we can never defeat them" But do we play a style where we make this type of partscore doubles ? Perhaps you have a point in a pair session where we need to catch up, then we might.

[dake50]

Yup! SKJ +HAK +CK sets (lets) 2S.

[kayin801]

I mean, it seems pretty likely that LHO is void in diamonds if we have any decent diamond holding (which I think we need to X) but I guess the spade holding is pretty important. If the X of 2♦ is takeout then can't we have diamonds and spades on this auction with a couple cards? I had been thinking with something like Qxxx, xx, KTxx, xxx isn't it rather unlikely that they're making 2♠, since their tricks are coming from... where now? Yes I suppose they probably have some sort of fit in an unbid suit but it still seems unlikely that they're scrambling 8 tricks. So if we have a little more than the hand I gave earlier isn't 300/500 available? If we give partner 16, RHO 13 for his rebid over 1NT, and LHO 6, the hand I gave is possible and really none of the 3 of them have to have exactly the points given.

My point is not that I think we should be doubling on air but I wonder sometimes with hands like these if we're leaving a MP top or 5-8ish imps on the table by not hitting the contract.