[portia2]

Your RHO opens 1N and you have 16+ balanced, should you double for penalties? It rarely works out. It seems cowardly to pass, however. Does p with his lowly assortment of points, have a role to play? Is it better to use X after a 1n opener to show a type of hand (say the Kit Wolsey convention)? And should you keep the double to play against the weak nt? Thanks 😊

This was my latest disaster. Also, just looking at my hand, what would you have led?

---

[DavidKok]

I think the general consensus on penalty doubles of 1NT openings is:

• Against strong NT it is not as valuable to have a penalty double. The points are likely to split close to 20/20, and defending 1NTX is one of the most difficult problems in card play, especially if the 20 points on your side divide, say, 17-3. On top of that you will have a shapely hand with fewer points with much higher frequency. So it is very sensible to play a double as artificial here, for example DONT or any other convention. I personally prefer playing competitive/destructive methods over their 1NT instead of constructive, but regardless of preference there are plenty of options.
  
• A weak 1NT opening should be considered a kind of preemptive bid without shape, and a penalty double is almost essential for the defense. If you do not have this in your arsenal the opponents will get to steal your bidding space too often, which is fine if you can grab a juicy +500 every once in a while to balance it out but poor otherwise.

As for the specific strength of penalty doubles, three popular agreements are "always 15+, regardless of range of the 1NT bid" (this is the way I play it), "from the upper range of their weak NT" and "from the lower range of their strong NT in second seat, since you are sitting over opener". If you decide to play penalty doubles over a strong 1NT then your hand falls within that range, although the lack of spot cards makes it a bit iffy. I would lead a small club (or perhaps a small spade).

Lastly I think your partner should have ran to 2♣. It is extremely unlikely that you have ~20 points or more, so 1NTX rates to make, likely with overtricks. North can see there is not a single entry to the hand, so the fact that South's points are well placed is irrelevant.

[AL78]

DavidKok, on 2020-August-20, 01:19, said:

I think the general consensus on penalty doubles of 1NT openings is:

• Against strong NT it is not as valuable to have a penalty double. The points are likely to split close to 20/20, and defending 1NTX is one of the most difficult problems in card play, especially if the 20 points on your side divide, say, 17-3. On top of that you will have a shapely hand with fewer points with much higher frequency. So it is very sensible to play a double as artificial here, for example DONT or any other convention. I personally prefer playing competitive/destructive methods over their 1NT instead of constructive, but regardless of preference there are plenty of options.
  
• A weak 1NT opening should be considered a kind of preemptive bid without shape, and a penalty double is almost essential for the defense. If you do not have this in your arsenal the opponents will get to steal your bidding space too often, which is fine if you can grab a juicy +500 every once in a while to balance it out but poor otherwise.

I tend to think a penalty double of a weak NT is somewhat overrated as to its importance. I cannot remember the last time I took a decent penalty using it (decent means +200 or better). In my experience two things tend to happen, they either scrape it or go one off for -100, or they wriggle to something that either makes or goes one off. You have to have good agreements as to what doubles and bids mean after they wriggle (which almost everyone in the UK does when doubled), otherwise you end up having no idea whether doubles are penalties or takeout.

[pilowsky]

For what its worth, I just gave the robots 6 deals where the opener had 15-17 balanced and RHO had 15-16.
GIB doesn't double.
But it bids Cappelletti on just about anything in my limited experience.
Weak NT, now that's a different ball of fish, which is why I am always very particular when people sit down and say "we play Acol" - There are so many variants of Acol about, that online it's useful to know in advance what you are up against.
With weak NT I like dbl to be "I have the same as they do and all systems on" - of course, this needs to be discussed in advance which is why it's a bit fiendish online.
In some ways, I think having Acol and SAYC at the same tournament is a little bit like having boxing and wrestling together: both tests of skill, but is it a wise combination?

[mcphee]

The problem with your dble of 1NT is you did not have it. Double does not invite partner to bid it says you have it beat.

[mcphee]

The problem with your dble of 1NT is you did not have it. Double does not invite partner to bid it says you have it beat.

[nige1]

Portia2 'Your RHO opens 1N and you have 16+ balanced, should you double for penalties? It rarely works out. It seems cowardly to pass, however. Does p with his lowly assortment of points, have a role to play? Is it better to use X after a 1n opener to show a type of hand (say the Kit Wolsey convention)? And should you keep the double to play against the weak nt? This was my latest disaster. Also, just looking at my hand, what would you have led?
+++++++++++++++++++
- Some Scottish experts recommend that double = top of the range for opponents' 1N opener; but -- heresy to traditional players -- advancer should take it out on weak hands.
- Charles Outred plays double = T/O with a 2/3 suiter. Bridge books by Hubert Philips show that this was standard expert practice, 60 years ago
- Over (1N), I play CROWHURST (2♣ = ART STAYMAN Ms, 2♦ = ART MULTI 6+ M, 2M = NAT LUCAS 5+ cards, 4+ m).
- FWIW, recently, I've added modified RAPTOR. Double = PEN OR ART 10+ HCP 5+ m and 4+ M. Then ...
-- Pass = 10+ HCP (If you can stand a lead in either minor. You have at least half the deck ).
- - 2♣ = P/C. unless the doubler passes of bids 2♦, he has strong hand..
- - 2♦ = ASK for M. Unless the doubler bids 2M, he has a strong hand.
- - 2M = S/O NAT to play. If the doubler bids 2N, he has a strong hand.
- - 2N = ASK
IMO, Portia should lead a black suit, probably ♣s, but perhaps ♠A. When partner has little, passive leads are less effective.

---

[Cyberyeti]

mcphee, on 2020-August-20, 04:12, said:

The problem with your dble of 1NT is you did not have it. Double does not invite partner to bid it says you have it beat.

I would double a weak no trump with that every day of the week, and might double a strong one, you look great if the two small hands are swapped.

The question is that if the other hands are say 4-4, do you really want to double ? and that's a simulation problem (probably one simulation to find the best lead overall, then another to apply that lead for all the hands), I'm much more comfortable doubling if I have an obvious lead, a 5th club or spade for example, which is the only reason I might not.

[mycroft]

Answering the opener: penalty doubles based on "I have a strong NT too" without a known lead or a source of tricks rely solely on the luck of where the other 8-10 HCP are. Sure, you're over the 1NTer, which is nice if you have tenaces, but you're also endplayed at trick 1, and potentially every time you get in. And the hand in the example should be lighting up alarm bells, because there aren't any tenaces to enjoy being over the strong hand, just 4 tricks and trash.

A good 5-card suit that could be set up, or danger suits and safe exits, so opener has to break the frozen suits, is a lot safer.

Does that mean you don't double with this hand? Not sure, but I wouldn't be happy about it. If partner has a couple cards, this will go down. Even with this hand, if partner has any entry to start the spades, that's 7 tricks right there. As I said, luck of the location of the other cards.

North American wisdom (where strong NTs are almost universal) is that the benefit of a conventional double (in a good conventional defence) is higher than a natural one. But if you still are interested in picking up some nice numbers, see my comment below about convertable doubles - they actually work really well against strong NTs, because 12-including-tricks opposite 9 plays better than 15 opposite 6, or 17 opposite 4, while still being safe when it's 12 opposite 3.

In defence of a penalty double over weak NTs (from a committed weak NTer):

I've said this before, but I agree with both of the following:

DavidKok said:

a penalty double is almost essential for the defense. If you do not have this in your arsenal the opponents will get to steal your bidding space too often

although I disagree that the goal of the penalty double is to find your best contract. If that's what we end up with, great. But we should be looking to penalize.

AL78 said:

I cannot remember the last time I took a decent penalty using it (decent means +200 or better).

I absolutely agree with this. In fact the last several times I've got a decent penalty from 1NTx was opposite a strong NT (because 15 opposite 3 tends to play worse than 12 opposite 6, and because strong NTers are less likely to have, or be comfortable with, rescue systems. Oh, and because I play in the ACBL, and play against at least 90% strong NTs).

However! That's not the goal of a penalty double, either. The goal is to allow partner to know whose hand it is, so that when they do wriggle out, she can make the decision to compete, or to sit (sometimes they wriggle to a +170, you know), or to lose all the cards in the bidding box that aren't red. The number of times I've known we were booked for an awful score, even if it's only the matchpoint Death Result of -200, only to have them pull to their +140 because they don't use the information from the penalty double properly, are legion.

Also, in a good defence to weak NT, the double sets a force to somewhere (which could be 1NT - as long as you and your partner know). That also helps your partner decide what to do when they wriggle (including allowing her to pass the buck back to you). I play "force through 2♦", because I hate seeing -X70 on my card, but "through 2♥" is probably better. Note that our runout system is designed to feast on the pairs who don't set any force at all - I've played 2♣-5 for amazing scores more than once.

If you decide to play some conventional double over a weak NT, you should ensure that it is penalty-convertable by advancer, and know what kinds of hands are needed to convert. The best penalty doubles come from a "one-loser single suit and an entry" that partner leaves in with a smattering of strength. Brozel's philosophy, for instance, is that their "one-suiter doubles" are Real Suits; this actually works well against weak NTs (whether they sit for it with "some cards" or whether they run, partner is well-placed to make the decision).

[pilowsky]

Come to think of it, I suspect the old adage "double of 1NT is for penalties" is mainly intended to apply in the situation where your partner has made an opening bid.
THEN RHO bids 1NT - usually because they have a balanced 15-16HCP. To be fair I can't take credit for this I read it a couple of days ago in Michael's book (Judgement at Bridge 2 - Mike Lawrence).
In this situation, if you find yourself with a nice stack of points then it's a different ball-game. Opps are definitely playing Snooker on a sticky wicket with a croquet hook.

[DavidKok]

pilowsky, on 2020-August-20, 13:47, said:

Come to think of it, I suspect the old adage "double of 1NT is for penalties" is mainly intended to apply in the situation where your partner has made an opening bid.

Actually I know quite a few people who play a double in third seat (over 1m-(1NT)-? in particular) here as takeout/Stayman, especially over a 1♣ opening where you would like to reserve 2♣ for a natural raise. Such a takeout double can be convertible, but it is not in principle penalty-oriented.

[mycroft]

They probably also play 1NT-X-p-2♣ as Stayman.

The danger of 1NT overcalls is that opener's partner with a random 8-count knows dummy's a blank, knows what to lead, and knows partner will get in to lead her suits through declarer, if setting up his suit isn't an option. Unless this is one of the pairs who will open any trash hand, reducing the danger of the 1NT overcall seems like a gift to the opponents far outweighing what they get by playing two of their fit on weaker hands. But I Could Be Wrong, maybe frequency kills over numbers.

[Stephen Tu]

DavidKok, on 2020-August-20, 16:48, said:

Actually I know quite a few people who play a double in third seat (over 1m-(1NT)-? in particular) here as takeout/Stayman, especially over a 1♣ opening where you would like to reserve 2♣ for a natural raise. Such a takeout double can be convertible, but it is not in principle penalty-oriented.

That's pretty weird IMO. How useful is a natural 2c that isn't worth competing to 3c? Club fit chances are reduced since RHO has announced length/strength in clubs, partner is more likely on short club opener? If you do have club fit their side will most often outbid you in 2M. Meanwhile you give up on penalizing them on power.

In my partnerships I play 2♣ after 1m-(1nt) as majors.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-August-20, 06:47, said:

I'm much more comfortable doubling if I have an obvious lead

This is the key. When the points are evenly split, or nearly so, the winners will be the pair who can set up their suits first. Attacking in your suit will usually put you ahead in the race.

For this reason, I want more points for a double in the protective seat, not fewer points as is sometimes suggested.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2020-August-25, 15:31, said:

This is the key. When the points are evenly split, or nearly so, the winners will be the pair who can set up their suits first. Attacking in your suit will usually put you ahead in the race.

For this reason, I want more points for a double in the protective seat, not fewer points as is sometimes suggested.

Partner is still there and if he has a 5 card suit and some modest values, it's probably worth leading, the issue is where he doesn't and leads his 4 card suit opposite your doubleton.