[ArtK78]

Playing with an expert partner, we had this unremarkable sequence. We were not on the same wavelength:

(1NT*) - P - (2♣) - x

1NT is 12-14.

What is the meaning of the double?

[Cyberyeti]

In the UK I'd suggest default is clubs without agreement, but many play it as "I would have doubled 1N for pens".

[gordontd]

Cyberyeti, on 2015-May-29, 00:58, said:

In the UK I'd suggest default is clubs without agreement, but many play it as "I would have doubled 1N for pens".

Agree. I think stronger players are more likely to play the second meaning, mainly because less experienced players haven't yet encountered it.

[MrAce]

I play all doubles of 2x whether they are natural or stayman or transfers, telling I would double weak NT. This was the most popular use of this dbl about 15 years among experts that know of. I have no idea what it is nowadays since I been away.

[helene_t]

I prefer it to show clubs, if they have a garbage stayman hand our most likely fit is clubs anyway and even if we can make 3NT and/or penalize 2M, it won't be easy to find out if we have the combined values for it.

[mikeh]

I am strongly of the view that it needs to be merely value-showing.....to me it shows a solid opening hand, balanced. Weak 1N players can steal the board very easily with a 2C call on nothing.

[PhilG007]

ArtK78, on 2015-May-28, 22:10, said:

Playing with an expert partner, we had this unremarkable sequence. We were not on the same wavelength:

(1NT*) - P - (2♣) - x

1NT is 12-14.

What is the meaning of the double?

Since 2♣ is Stayman and conventional,the double has to show a club suit and
is lead directing. The doubler probably has a hand like ♠Jxx ♥Qxx ♦x ♣ AQJ10xx

[mikeh]

PhilG007, on 2015-May-29, 05:45, said:

Since 2♣ is Stayman and conventional,the double has to show a club suit and
is lead directing

Do you have any real life bridge success such that readers of your post can assess the credibility of such pronouncements as the double 'has' to show clubs?

I know a fair number of National Champions who play it as card showing, so maybe you can tell us about your credentials so that I can assess whether to change my methods, lol.

[PhilG007]

mikeh, on 2015-May-29, 05:49, said:

Do you have any real life bridge success such that readers of your post can assess the credibility of such pronouncements as the double 'has' to show clubs?

I know a fair number of National Champions who play it as card showing, so maybe you can tell us about your credentials so that I can assess whether to change my methods, lol.

When a conventional bid is doubled,logic says it shows a natural holding in the suit. In the same way the double of a Blackwood response eg 4NT-5♥-X
would show a heart suit and is also lead directing.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2015-May-29, 05:49, said:

Do you have any real life bridge success such that readers of your post can assess the credibility of such pronouncements as the double 'has' to show clubs?

I know a fair number of National Champions who play it as card showing, so maybe you can tell us about your credentials so that I can assess whether to change my methods, lol.

I think he's suggesting more that without discussion, unless something is played by pretty much everybody, you use the unalerted meaning as the default which is clubs.

[mikeh]

You may be correct and, in fairness, if in the OP situation, I would assume that partner meant clubs unless I knew that he knew me. By that, I mean that I think that most players would assume lead-directing, even tho I think many experts think that to be second-best. It is one of those situations where I would assume partner was assuming that I played it lead-directing if he or she wasn't familiar with me. However, the poster in question likes to make dogmatic, and idiotic, statements all the time so I'm going to stick with my interpretation of his intent

[ArtK78]

Thanks, all. My partner, who is a National Champion, intended it as lead directing. I thought that it showed values - equivalent to a double of a weak NT opening.

Humor sidelight.

This was the auction that happened at the table. It was humorous to me, but not so to my LHO (the club bidder), who, to his credit, did not intend his last bid to be natural. His partner was on another planet.

(1NT) - P - (2♣) - x
(P) - P - (3♣) - ALL PASS

This was not a success,

[Phil]

It LOGICALLY must show values. With a club suit I can bid 3 ♣.

I can't believe I'm saying this.

[aguahombre]

ArtK78, on 2015-May-29, 07:02, said:

Thanks, all. My partner, who is a National Champion, intended it as lead directing. I thought that it showed values - equivalent to a double of a weak NT opening.

Very interesting. If partner and I are experienced enough to know about the superior "card-showing" alternative, but haven't discussed it, we are totally screwed into not using the Double at all...and then will further screw ourselves with a 1-minute tank.

[Cyberyeti]

Phil, on 2015-May-29, 07:45, said:

It LOGICALLY must show values. With a club suit I can bid 3 ♣.

I can't believe I'm saying this.

Depends, we'll hit it as purely lead directing, one of our biggest success being off AQ10x and out (and nobody's played redoubled yet).

[aguahombre]

Cyberyeti, on 2015-May-29, 09:29, said:

Depends, we'll hit it as purely lead directing, one of our biggest success being off AQ10x and out (and nobody's played redoubled yet).

When they do, I believe the correct score is 2420.

[mycroft]

Without agreement, I would assume people would fall back on the meta-agreement "doubles of artificial bids are lead-directing".

Playing a weak NT, I, too, would want that double to be cards - overriding my meta-agreement with a real one.

Playing Keri over a weak NT, I'm not so sure. One downside to Keri is that you don't have "runout Stayman" available; one upside to Keri is that 2♣ is usually sound (unless I'm planning on playing 2♦), so the opponents are much more likely to have a club suit than cards.

[gszes]

I must admit to preferring the x to show clubs with a decent (Axx xx Axx KQxxx) hand. The card showing x (which can easily be an ace stronger) can wait until the opps reveal their garbage stayman. If the opps do not have a garbage stayman all one is accomplishing with x is to tell the opps how to play the hand since p will invariably be broke. This also leaves 3c available as a preempt. I can't believe is saw biting sarcasm from Mikeh:)

[WesleyC]

All the experts I know use this double as values. Admittedly I come from a part of the world where weak NT is fairly common.

[Jinksy]

I would also play as values, fwiw.

Out of curiosity, how do those who play it the same treat the second double in sequence like this:

1N* X 2C** X

* still 12-14
** showing something other than clubs (eg exit transfer)

Atm we play it as something analogous to the OP X - showing 'values', though in this case where 'values' just means 'confirming we have the majority of the points', ie a decent 6+.

Do others have similar agreements?