Help
mikeh, on 2018-August-02, 09:34, said:
No they weren't.
They were invented by Rodwell to fill a weakness in which his then-partner occasionally responded in a 3 card major.
They were invented by Rodwell to fill a weakness in which his then-partner occasionally responded in a 3 card major.
Fair enough. MikeH is a far more experienced player than I am, but I suspect that he has less experience of playing Weak No Trump systems. I stumbled across my copy of an Eric Rodwell article on Support Doubles and this prompted me into putting together a more detailed response. On one level MikeH is correct - here is a direct quote from Rodwell in the article:
Quote
I invented this convention originally to avoid playing in a 3-3 major suit fit. [...] I thought it clever to bid 1♥ or 1♠ on a three-card suit, My partner, Mr Bloom, thought it right to raise on three-card support.
But let's examine this more closely. Rodwell doesn't give any hands for these 3-3 "fits", but I think that it is a safe guess that these three-card suits were in balanced hands and that opener held a Weak No Trump hand type. The first hand that Rodwell quotes is (i):
Rodwell argues that, holding two-card heart support, South should pass and try for a plus on defence. He contrasts this hand with (ii) ♠A874 ♥Q92 ♦AK87 ♣93 where a double would show three-card heart support and (iii) ♠A87 ♥Q952 ♦AK87 ♣93 where you raise to show four-card support. This is all very neat, allowing accurate part-score competition, based on the level of fit with three bids (Pass, Double, 2♠) describing the heart length and allowing partner to judge how high to compete in line with the Law of Total Tricks. These are bread and butter auctions in a Strong No Trump system and Support Doubles are recommended (even at the expense of using two, otherwise useful, bids - Pass and Double). Without support doubles, you will face a difficult problem with three-card support and not knowing whether an eight-card fit exists.
But note that all three of Rodwell's example hands fall within the Weak No Trump range. This is not a surprise and the fact that this is a high frequency auction type was understood by Rodwell who later in the article describes a 12-14 balanced hand as a "normal hand". I still contend that an implied assumption when developing the system was a Strong No Trump context, where judging competition on these part-score normal hands was key.
Now consider the situation if playing a Weak No Trump system. These normal balanced hands are opened 1NT, so if opener is balanced the hand will be 15+ HCPs. Let's add a king to Rodwell's first hand to see the effect of opening 1m in the Strong No Trump range (iv) ♠A874 ♥92 ♦AK87 ♣KQ9. This doesn't prove to be a problem with ace-to-four in opponents suit, you simply rebid 1NT as originally intended when you made the opening bid, completing the picture of your hand. Partner can use whatever version of check-back you are using to inquire further. The problem is if you hold no stop, or an inadequate stop in the opponent's suit - say (v):
Things have subtly changed when you compare to Rodwell's 12-14 strength hands:
- This is a lower frequency auction*, both because a balanced 15-17 occurs less often than a balanced 12-14, but also because the opponents have fewer values to barge into our auction (particularly if they have to do it at the two level) and fewer values to raise when they do interfere.
- We have at least our fair share of the points.
- With additional values we now need to factor in the possibility of game our way. (When we opened with a balanced 12-14 we didn't need to consider game, since it was only likely if partner held opening values, in which case partner could take control).
- We also need to keep alive the possibility of extracting a penalty if opponents have an inadequate overcall.
- Most importantly, we can't afford to make a non-forcing pass to show our doubleton support. It would be unfortunate to defend 1♠ with game available our way.
- With no other bid available, we really need to use Double to show this hand type.
This is the key to my belief that Support Doubles are a bad option to combine with a Weak No Trump system. You need to double on Strong No Trump type hands - whether or not you hold three-card support for partner.
I am not saying that you can't find hands where a Support Double might have been useful in a Weak No Trump system. Rodwell gives an example hand that clearly works whichever No-trump you play (vi): ♠AQ9 ♥654 ♦AK10765 ♣3 on the auction: 1♦, (1♥, 1♠, (2♦), Double. But I suggest that on grounds of frequency and utility it is better to play a double to show a Strong No Trump hand with an inadequate stop. It is usually possible to find an alternative bid on these unbalanced hand types. In this example you have three possibilities: bid 2♠, notwithstanding the three-card support; bid 3♦, showing the good quality six-card suit or Double treating this nice hand as worth 15+.
Doubling with a Strong No Trump type hand defines our hand type and strength in a single bid and allows partner to judge the future auction including game (or even slam!) possibilities or judging to pass for penalties. Passing conveys the meaning that opener has a limited unbalanced hand (or maybe length and strength in the opponents suit). Both of these calls are helpful in allowing partner to judge the auction and would be unavailable if harnessed to the Support Double cause.
* If playing the style of four-card majors where you open a major before a minor this is an impossible auction!
