[pescetom]

As is evident from the name, DOPI/ROPI assumes that 0 is the first element in the series of replies and 1 is the second. Nonetheless, it can be applied to any series of elements whatever the actual values represented by each element, the essence being that Double/Redouble indicates the first element, Pass the second element, and so on. Thus for example playing DOPI/ROPI over Ogust, Double/Redouble corresponds to the first element in the series (3♣) meaning poor suit and a weak hand.

It is long agreed with my main partner that we play DOPI/ROPI after interference (below 5 in trumps) over any ask which foresees a series of replies, such as Ogust, Gerber or RKCB. Since then we changed the RKCB reply scheme from 0314 to 1403. Now I discovered (luckily not during competition) that we interpret the application of ROPI/DOPI to RKCB differently: I expect Double/Redouble to still correspond to the first element of the series (as it does with any other ask) and thus 1|4 keycards, whereas partner expects it to correspond to the actual value 0|3, "as the acronym suggests". Looking for the "correct" solution to this dilemma in internet suggests that when playing RKCB as 1403 then Double/Redouble should show 1|4 (as I would expect) but that this should be described as DIPO/RIPO

To my mind, it's just a detail of the RKCB convention that we inverted the first two replies of the series, DOPI/ROPI still applies the same way. But if I have to call that DIPO/RIPO on the convention card (or to convince my literal minded partner) then no problem.

How do other people handle / describe this when playing 1403 RKCB? I understand it's basically just a semantic issue, but slams are missed because of details like this.

[0deary]

The short answer to your question is “no” I offer this:

The DOPI idea is that f you have no Ace you must double. Partner then either stands in their doubled contract or moves to our safe 5 level contract. The idea is we are prime movers and opponents are sacrificers so logically I can offer a little Ace knowledge allowing partner to make a decision- typically small slam or sacrifice

As I see it there is a problem to this. It might not be so clear as to who is the sacrificer, and I don’t want to have to allow opponents to make their doubled contract. And it could be that we are the minor holders and they are the major holder, so we can’t bail out from their doubled contract without exposing us to worse

Now you suggest the double shows 4/1 Ace and not 0, based on your reversal in RKCB. Now you are not committed to doubling opponents unless you have a little more stuffing. To my mind that’s a useful improvement! Pass quietly with no Ace-fine. And Redouble is based on more stuffing

DIPO it is! I presume it’s licensed and full immediate disclosure is made

Bravo!

[pescetom]

0deary, on 2018-April-28, 02:51, said:

The DOPI idea is that f you have no Ace you must double. Partner then either stands in their doubled contract or moves to our safe 5 level contract. The idea is we are prime movers and opponents are sacrificers so logically I can offer a little Ace knowledge allowing partner to make a decision- typically small slam or sacrifice

As I see it there is a problem to this. It might not be so clear as to who is the sacrificer, and I don’t want to have to allow opponents to make their doubled contract. And it could be that we are the minor holders and they are the major holder, so we can’t bail out from their doubled contract without exposing us to worse

Now you suggest the double shows 4/1 Ace and not 0, based on your reversal in RKCB. Now you are not committed to doubling opponents unless you have a little more stuffing. To my mind that’s a useful improvement! Pass quietly with no Ace-fine. And Redouble is based on more stuffing

So you're saying that from a technical point of view it is better to double with 1|4 and pass with 0|3. That's intriguing, because I remember other discussions where people argued that among experts the consensus was to pass "with more stuffing" and double without, meaning 0|3 in this case. It would be interesting to know what others think on this.

0deary, on 2018-April-28, 02:51, said:

DIPO it is! I presume it’s licensed and full immediate disclosure is made

My choice to use double to show 1|4 is actually not based on presumed technical advantages but merely to maintain consistency with the way we play RKCB (1403) and the way we handle interference over asks (DOPI).
I certainly want to disclose this agreement correctly (not sure what you mean by immediate, because it's not alertable) but my doubt in that regard is whether on the Convention Card I should call it DIPO/RIPO (reflecting the actual value of replies) or DOPI/ROPI (reflecting the order of replies in the relevant convention). You seem to agree with most internet sources that if double/redouble shows 1|4 it should be called DIPO/RIPO, independent of whether the RKCB replies are actually 0314 or 1403.

[Phil]

I used to play D1P0 to be consistent with 1430, but it seems everyone plays D0P1 so I switched back.

[pescetom]

Phil, on 2018-April-28, 10:01, said:

I used to play D1P0 to be consistent with 1430, but it seems everyone plays D0P1 so I switched back.

Meaning that you play D=03 but without interference you play 5C=14?
How do you describe that on the CC?

[Flem72]

D1P2 by steps, or "elements"

[msjennifer]

As per my personal opinion,DOPI or DIPO are both playable with prior discussion about what actions you take if the next player has his own conventions and makes an undescribed bid over it.However,in general ,the occasions to use either of these are not many.A large number of players are observed to be playing DOPI. that does not need much to be discussed.One of my colleagues was interested in knowing if one can play DOPI over opponents 4NT {simple or RKC) bid and if it would serve any purpose.

[sfi]

My personal favourite is Pass=0 and double=1. That's just because I like telling people that I play POXI though.

[0deary]

I suppose POXI must be positional as double game tussles tend to crop up with voids, so opponents are likely double your voidwood bid and you can’t now pass in 4th. Maybe resurrect DIP O’s dead cousin RIP O?....☠️