[Adam1105]

---

I'm West and I bid takeout double. After opener's raise to 2♦, my partner East doubles. After thinking some I couldn't see this double as anything but "penalty." My partner didn't think so -- he obviously thought it meant I was to choose a suit, I guess.

Is this my Polish partner's Polish system? I'm I wrong to think it's "penalty double?"
--

[inquiry]

Partner's double is most likely "responsive". If you are unfamiliar with responsive doubles, google the phrase "responsive double." Yes, he is asking you to bid a suit. The use of a responsive double is not a part of a polish system, but no doubt polish systems include it. Of course, if he thinks his double is penalty, then it is penalty.

[Antrax]

Is it common play responsive doubles here? After the first double you're already down to two strains, why would you need another double to respond to that?

[ggwhiz]

Antrax, on 2013-June-11, 21:13, said:

Is it common play responsive doubles here?

It is common but so is the over/under principle where you are sitting over (behind) the diamond suit here it's penalty. Probably not as common today but I still play it that way.

1♦ - dbl - 1♥ - p
2♦ - p - p - dbl would be takeout in this style cause a double of 1♥ would show evil intent.

I'll be surprised if this is not a minority view though.

[ArtK78]

In my opinion, the double of 2♦ is a pure penalty double. There is no reason why East can't bid a black suit if he has one. On the other hand, he could easily have a real penalty double of 2♦ and the only way to show it would be to double immediately.

Why would one want to play responsive doubles by East on this sequence?

[1eyedjack]

Penalty. Partner trapped over 1D

[mike777]

it seems trapping over 1d nv is common given this thread

I am going to guess x is takeout over 2d even here.

more likely x is wrong as takeout or as penalty...my bet

[Codo]

I bet that the big guys play it as responsive, because they double 1♥ with a less then perfect shape. But for me it would be penalty and I would sit for it.

This post has been edited by Codo: 2013-June-12, 06:05

[wank]

yes penalty

[blackshoe]

The post mortem should be interesting.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2013-June-12, 06:24, said:

The post mortem should be interesting.

If the original double was made with fewer than 4 spades, he loses the post mortem, and they end up in the wrong contract as a result, he loses the post mortem.

[nige1]

Adam1105, on 2013-June-11, 18:37, said:

---

I'm West and I bid takeout double. After opener's raise to 2♦, my partner East doubles. After thinking some I couldn't see this double as anything but "penalty." My partner didn't think so -- he obviously thought it meant I was to choose a suit, I guess. Is this my Polish partner's Polish system? I'm I wrong to think it's "penalty double?"

IMO, partner's double should be penalty, no matter what system you are playing.

[ArtK78]

nige1, on 2013-June-12, 10:49, said:

IMO, partner's double should be penalty, no matter what system you are playing.

Nigel agrees with me. Maybe I should rethink my answer?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

inquiry, on 2013-June-11, 21:02, said:

Partner's double is most likely "responsive". If you are unfamiliar with responsive doubles, google the phrase "responsive double." Yes, he is asking you to bid a suit. The use of a responsive double is not a part of a polish system, but no doubt polish systems include it. Of course, if he thinks his double is penalty, then it is penalty.

I don't have ( or find ) any reference that shows this as a Responsive DBL ... do you ?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I have this reference in my files:

http://www.pattayabr...oubles_main.htm

And does this example that they give look familiar:

1D - p - 1S - DBL
2D - DBL

They defined the 2nd DBL as Penalty since:
a) partner has described his hand ( ostensibly showing the unbid suits with the T/O DBL );
b) thus, essentially, there is NO "unbid" suit .

[inquiry]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-June-13, 12:52, said:

I don't have ( or find ) any reference that shows this as a Responsive DBL ... do you ?

I don't have a exact auction example where this would be quoted as a responsive double. Many people play responsive doubles after partner makes a TO double and the next hand raises (ie 1Z - X - 2Z - X). Others add responsive doubles to the auction after partner doubles and RHO bids a new suit (ie 1Y - x - 1/2 Z - x). I will refer you to Larry Cohen's article on "LC-Standard"... see this page on Bridgewinners (you will need a browser other than Internet explorer I believe) for this second treatment.

http://bridgewinners...andard-doubles/

As I noted in my post "if" partner thinks his bid is takeout, he is playing it as a responsive double, and that is not per se limited to Polish system. Now this auction is different since the second doubler is a passed hand, ie 1Y p 1(or 2)Z - dbl - 2Y, - dbl. In my opinion this "should be penalty" as I noted in my first reply ("Of course if he thinks this should be penalty, then it is penalty). I wasn't trying to express my personal view one way or the other on what it SHOULD be, but only addressing what his partner thought it was based on his partner saying he wanted the initial doubler to pick a suit.

[EarlPurple]

A major issue here is that the opponents have not found a fit. The regular "responsive" double is made when the opponents have found a fit. Partner doubled for take-out and the next player raised. Now you have more than one place to play and a few values so you double to show such a hand.

In the auction above, the double of 2♦ should be penalties. Of course we could find ourselves "swindled" with hearts being our best suit, either because the 1♥ bid was psychic or because they are breaking 4-4-4-1 round the table. You may also find diamonds 6-4-2-1 round the table. At least 2♦X isn't game should it sneak through.

[hsheng]

While depending on a pre-agreement, if opps are vulnerable but you not, it probably a penalty double.