[acclaim9]

advancer's bid after 1nr,dbl,pass

[Tramticket]

acclaim9, on 2018-July-31, 09:03, said:

advancer's bid after 1nr,dbl,pass

What strength is the NT? Is the double for penalties?

Assuming a penalty double, a bid would normally show a weak (up to say a four-count) hand with 5+ card suit. A pass would usually either suggest some values or be a balanced hand with no other places to play.

[acclaim9]

the dbl after the NT opening is a take out dbl

[acclaim9]

the dbl is a takeout dbl question can the advancer pas the dbl

[ggwhiz]

Hi,

The short answer is yes similar to if they open 1♣, my partner doubles and I have 7 of them with a few points.

However playing the double as takeout gives advancer no useful info with which to make a decision. Google or search acbl.org for methods vs 1nt openers and you will find a ton of options that all include a stronger definition of what double shows. Whatever that may be it's essential to avoid advancer having a nervous breakdown.

The one I currently play is that double shows a 1 suited hand strong enough that I hope you can pass (good lead, good points) and I just bid my suit if I'm not that strong. If you can't pass it you just bid 2♣ and I'll tell you what my suit is knowing you are weak.

[Stephen Tu]

There's really no such thing as a "takeout dbl" of 1nt. Takeout to where? If the double = support for all suits, that means the takeout doubler is balanced = suggests playing in NT = why wouldn't you leave it in especially having tempo of opening lead, if your side rates to have the power.
So people play dbl of notrump as either:a) penalty. In which case advancer normally passes it, but can run if weak with a long suit, fearing that they are making it. With nowhere to go you often just sit, because sometimes partner has it beat by himself (doubling with good suit of his own plus entries), and because sometimes running just makes it worse (-200, -300, instead of -180).
or

b) conventional. If it's conventional, typically it shows either a 1 suiter (e.g. DONT, Brozel), where advancer is expected to bid 2c usually, after which overcaller names their suit. By agreement, if you keep the doubles up to some min std, you can allow advancer to leave it in with a good hand, how good it has to be depends on how strong the dbl has to be.
Or the double shows a 2-suiter (e.g. Lionel, Woolsey, Meyerson), in which case the specific convention tends to specify which bids mean what depending on what suits the dbl can contain and the relative lengths.

Or it can show one of multiple hand types (Meckwell), typically one bids 2c then overcaller clarifies.

[TylerE]

acclaim9, on 2018-July-31, 10:51, said:

the dbl after the NT opening is a take out dbl

Then I would pass, because your opponents are.... not very bright.

[hrothgar]

acclaim9, on 2018-July-31, 09:03, said:

advancer's bid after 1nr,dbl,pass

"It depends"

If you're playing a weak NT, you should definitely have already discussed your run out schemes with partner.
In particular, what does partner do if they are broke.

If you're playing a strong NT, you should have the same discussion, but its not quite as important.

Either way, this is a matter for discussion because there are different schools of thought.

[sfi]

Stephen Tu, on 2018-July-31, 14:01, said:

There's really no such thing as a "takeout dbl" of 1nt. Takeout to where? If the double = support for all suits, that means the takeout doubler is balanced = suggests playing in NT = why wouldn't you leave it in especially having tempo of opening lead, if your side rates to have the power.

Takeout doubles of 1NT do exist.

Years ago while playing a weak NT, partner opened 1NT and RHO doubled. I looked at my balanced Yarborough and asked what the double was. I was told takeout, so I passed (our agreement at the time was to ignore doubles that weren't penalty so our runout structure didn't apply). LHO contemplated her hand for a while and decided to go low with 2C, so we defended there. It turns out RHO really did have an opening hand with three-card support for all unbid suits and LHO held a balanced 11 count and decided it wasn't worth jumping with. 2C on their combined 27 points was not a huge success.

Ever since, my notes state that a "takeout double" is treated the same way as a penalty double. That note has even been necessary a few times since.

[mikeh]

Richard.....the OP was asking about advancer, not responder.

OP: I commend Stephen's post to you, especially where he says that there really isn't such as a thing as a 'take-out' double of a 1N opening bid.

The idea of a takeout double developed fairly early in the game of bridge, which is only 80 years old. It shows a hand with support for the unbid suits, and evolved initially to deal with a 1suit opening bid on one's right....2-bids back then were pretty much universally played as strong, and the general wisdom of the day was that one rarely competed when the opps showed strength, so takeout doubles of 2-bids were very rare.

The prototypical takeout double of a suit opening would be opening values with 4441 shape, short in opener's suit. Of course, one rarely has a prototypical hand, but this ideal is a useful guide when advancing a takeout double.

If one has all 4 suits, and opener has all 4 suits and 15-17 hcp, the odds are that it is a bad idea to want to have partner 'takeout' a double when he has modest values, and often just as bad or worse to have him leave it in. Hence, one does not double 1N with a balanced opening hand...one passes.

Occasionally, advancer's hand is such that doubling would have worked, but one should also consider that one could open 7N on every hand and once in a while you'd reach an otherwise unreachable making contract. Of course that would be silly, because bridge is a game of percentages. The percentages say that a takeout double of 1N, based on an opening hand, is a bad idea.

As to what to use it for...as Stephen mentioned, there are a myriad of options.

If 1N is weak, then it is, imo, essential to have a penalty-oriented double available..my suggestion is that it should be a stronger hand than the top of their range. You will find many players, especially non-experts, say that one should double a weak 1N with a hand equal to their range. As someone who played 10-12 in world championship events (as well as all other levels) I assure you that this is a bad, bad idea.

if 1N is strong, then whether you play it as penalty-oriented or as some form of artificial takeout is a question of taste and partnership preference. I haven't played a penalty double in 25+ years, and rarely miss it (altho against top players 40 and under, we play penalty doubles of their 14-16, since they often have 13).

When a double is penalty-oriented, that doesn't make it 'penalty'. Advancer is expected to pass with values, unless he has extreme shape. He is expected to run with a 5+ suit and a weak hand...say 0-3 hcp. He is expected to pass with most balanced weak hands, and to hope that partner has something like Ax KQJ109x Ax Kx Which my partners never did.

I hope this helps

[ahydra]

After a strong NT and conventional double (e.g. X = 5m4M), advancer could still pass for penalty with good values. In a situation where you've got say 10 opposite 12 and the opponents have 15-17 opposite 1-3, then you certainly have the advantage in a race to 7 tricks - the opening lead, at least one suit known to be 5 cards, and most importantly communication between the hands.

ahydra

[msjennifer]

Since the 1NT range is not specified,it is not possible to comment as the treatment against weak NT and that against a strong NT have to be discussed and there are many gadgets available.However ,now a days a double of a 1NT bid is for penalties and with 5or more HCP partner is expected to pass as has been already pointed out by other colleagues.Very few ,if any,play it as a TOD and Stephen Wu has very nicely explained that.

[PhilG007]

acclaim9, on 2018-July-31, 09:03, said:

advancer's bid after 1nr,dbl,pass

I always regard the double of a 1nt opener as for penalties and should not be removed unless holding a very weak hand.

[hrothgar]

mikeh, on 2018-July-31, 17:02, said:

Richard.....the OP was asking about advancer, not responder.

D'oh! (Thanks)