[broze]

Matchpoints, R/W

---

How much does your decision depend on the form of scoring/vulnerability?

If you choose to leave the dbl in, what do you lead?

[rhm]

If this is not the hand, with which you would want to pull, what does a hand look like, where you would want to?

Rainer Herrmann

[ArtK78]

You have NO help for partner at all. Unless you expect him to take 7 tricks in his own hand, you should pull.

[Of course, partner probably has AKx of diamonds and the ♦Q is falling, so you have 6 tricks. Otherwise, why would this problem be here?]

I would never reach the second part of this problem, but if I left the double in, I would lead a diamond.

[nige1]

broze, on 2013-August-05, 05:00, said:

Matchpoints, R/W
How much does your decision depend on the form of scoring/vulnerability?
If you choose to leave the dbl in, what do you lead?

---

Persuaded by rhm and Artk78:

• 2♦ = 10, Pass = 5.
• There is a case for pass, if you need a top at pairs.
• Against 1NX, ♦ = 10, ♠ = 9. The latter if double asks for a ♠ lead.

[Free]

nige1, on 2013-August-05, 07:38, said:

There is a case for pass, if you need a topbottom at pairs.

FYP

[gszes]

we start out by picturing a hand for p where the bidding makes sense.

AQT9x Ax Kxx AKx p may be a tad weaker or a tad stronger. We can see
that allowing the opps to play 1n can easily be a complete disaster since
we might be limited to 5 tricks anytime one of the opps has Axx of dia.

Openers hand does not have to have 3 dia and then the odds of the x
being successful plummet to almost nonexistence. Once we realize this
it becomes increasingly obvious we should pull this hand to

2d

and just be ready to say SP if by chance a spade lead would have set
1n (you aren't going to actually lead a dia if you leave it in are you?)

change one of my side jacks to the spade J and I am trying to keep
a straight face because I am expecting good things to happen.

[FrancesHinden]

This is a pretty silly auction to double 1NT on as opener for penalties on a balanced 18-count - why should it ever not be making - so there are two possible meanings for the double. I hope you have discussed them with your partner:
1. I have a strong balanced hand; pass if you have scattered values, or bid if you have a long suit to compete the part-score
2. This is going off on a spade lead because I have a solid suit and outside entries

Obviously you bid if partner has 1 and you pass if partner has 2

I've agreed a third meaning for double with my partner: if he has opened 1 non-spade and it goes 1x 1NT P P dbl, that shows 4 spades + his suit and invites me to compete. This auction shows the majors.

[mycroft]

Isn't 2♦ directly over 1NT this hand? Or do you want something like KJxxxx? Otherwise, yes, I pull. If I were 2443 2-count, no, but this one is likely to be 280 both ways.

[Siegmund]

I would want a better hand to bid immediately - even Kxxxxx and out I would be wary.

Pulling seems obvious. Not only is there a chance 1NT will make if partner has just 18 rather than 22-- they are not vulnerable, and down one won't be any good either if we have 110 available in either of our side's suits.

[the hog]

No, I am passing. Partner has KQJTxx Axx Ax xx
He will not be happy when you pull. If your partner has a balanced 18-19pt hand I suggest you get another partner. To those who suggest leading a D - you are kidding, aren't you?

[the hog]

gszes, on 2013-August-05, 11:10, said:

we start out by picturing a hand for p where the bidding makes sense.

AQT9x Ax Kxx AKx p may be a tad weaker or a tad stronger. We can see
that allowing the opps to play 1n can easily be a complete disaster since
we might be limited to 5 tricks anytime one of the opps has Axx of dia.

Openers hand does not have to have 3 dia and then the odds of the x
being successful plummet to almost nonexistence. Once we realize this
it becomes increasingly obvious we should pull this hand to

2d

and just be ready to say SP if by chance a spade lead would have set
1n (you aren't going to actually lead a dia if you leave it in are you?)

change one of my side jacks to the spade J and I am trying to keep
a straight face because I am expecting good things to happen.

This is an impossible hand. This is a 2NT opening to start off with.

[Free]

the hog, on 2013-August-06, 21:59, said:

No, I am passing. Partner has KQJTxx Axx Ax xx
He will not be happy when you pull. If your partner has a balanced 18-19pt hand I suggest you get another partner. To those who suggest leading a D - you are kidding, aren't you?

Or he'll yell at you for not pulling because ♣s split 6-2...

[the hog]

Free, on 2013-August-07, 02:38, said:

Or he'll yell at you for not pulling because ♣s split 6-2...

Well at least that's not an overtrick

[P_Marlowe]

Why should I leave it in?

Partner did not open 2NT, this means, the points are roughly 20:20,
not ideal for defending 1NT.
If I pass, which would not cross my mind, I lead spade.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rhm]

the hog, on 2013-August-06, 21:59, said:

No, I am passing. Partner has KQJTxx Axx Ax xx
He will not be happy when you pull. If your partner has a balanced 18-19pt hand I suggest you get another partner. To those who suggest leading a D - you are kidding, aren't you?

If you have an agreement that DBL suggests that you have 7 tricks in your own hand, provided partner leads your suit, fine.

There are several problems with that:

1.) Ethically you should be obliged to alert and inform your opponents about your agreement, which means sane opponents would never remain in 1NT doubled. Just telling them your DBL is penalty is insufficient!
2.) The non-vulnerable opponents are just one down. Big deal! I rather pass or bid 2♠ than chasing them into a successful heart contract. They can make game there on your construction.
3.) You can wait your remaining lifetime, before you will get a chance to employ your clever double.

If we agree that responder needs about 8+ HCP to double a one notrump overcall what is so terrible to reopen with a double holding 18-19 balanced?
If the remaining values are with partner opponents might just have stolen 3NT from you.
Yes, this could possibly backfire if partner is broke, but it is not so likely that all remaining values are in advancers hand. Even if, partner can usually escape (like here) or bid 2♠.
Defending 1NT with 18-19 balanced undoubled is not likely to produce a good matchpoint score your way, particularly when opponents are not vulnerable.

Rainer Herrmann

[the hog]

rhm, on 2013-August-07, 02:54, said:

If you have an agreement that DBL suggests that you have 7 tricks in your own hand, provided partner leads your suit, fine.

There are several problems with that:

1.) Ethically you should be obliged to alert and inform your opponents about your agreement, which means sane opponents would never remain in 1NT doubled. Just telling them your DBL is penalty is insufficient!
2.) The non-vulnerable opponents are just one down. Big deal! I rather pass or bid 2♠ than chasing them into a successful heart contract. They can make game there on your construction.
3.) You can wait your remaining lifetime, before you will get a chance to employ your clever double.

If we agree that responder needs about 8+ HCP to double a one notrump overcall what is so terrible to reopen with a double holding 18-19 balanced?
If the remaining values are with partner opponents might just have stolen 3NT from you.
Yes, this could possibly backfire if partner is broke, but it is not so likely that all remaining values are in advancers hand. Even if, partner can usually escape (like here) or bid 2♠.
Defending 1NT with 18-19 balanced undoubled is not likely to produce a good matchpoint score your way, particularly when opponents are not vulnerable.

Rainer Herrmann

Re point 1
This is a ridiculous comment. A penalty x is a penalty x

Point 2
One down AT WORST! Maybe pd has longer S.

Point 3
Maybe, but if you play with idiots who double on flat 18-19 counts YOU will get a lot of bad scores.

[Zelandakh]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-August-05, 15:06, said:

I've agreed a third meaning for double with my partner: if he has opened 1 non-spade and it goes 1x 1NT P P dbl, that shows 4 spades + his suit and invites me to compete. This auction shows the majors.

What would a 2♥ rebid have shown instead? Is there any advantage in playing X = ♥; 2m = nat rather than X = ♣; 2♣ = ♦; 2♦ = ♥?

[PhilKing]

Zelandakh, on 2013-November-29, 05:30, said:

What would a 2♥ rebid have shown instead? Is there any advantage in playing X = ♥; 2m = nat rather than X = ♣; 2♣ = ♦; 2♦ = ♥?

The way I do it, double shows a strong hand with 4 hearts and 2♥ shows 5-5+.

[jallerton]

Zelandakh, on 2013-November-29, 05:30, said:

What would a 2♥ rebid have shown instead? Is there any advantage in playing X = ♥; 2m = nat rather than X = ♣; 2♣ = ♦; 2♦ = ♥?

There's no advantage in playing transfers in this position as (i) Opener is unlikely to have enough strength to make a third bid on his own, (ii) there is the danger of one of you forgetting, and (iii) it's better to put the strong hand on lead.

I agree with Phil's suggestion, but another possibility would be to differentiate on the basis of strength. If you double with the stronger two-suited variety, sometimes partner can pass.

[ggwhiz]

If 1nt is going down opposite this dreck you can't double often enough.

Pard wants to compete and hammer them if I have something. I have nothing so I compete.