I saw in the Dutch BF magazine that you need at least KQTxx to double 2♣ Stayman (assuming opps play 15-17 1NT). A few days later my p made a lead-directing double (admittedly, it was at the 4-level) on Qxx. Curious to know what people here consider a minimum.
Also, do you ever double on a 4-card? How good does it need to be?
Page 1 of 1
Lead-directing doubles How much do I need?
#1
Posted 2008-July-21, 04:59
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#2
Posted 2008-July-21, 06:53
I'd double Stayman with ♣KQJ10 and an ace. Obviously there's a small risk of conceding 760 or 1160, but that has to be balanced against the huge improvement in the chance of beating 3NT if that's what they bid. Also, the double may talk them out of a making 3NT and into some unlucky 4-3 fit.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#3 Guest_movingon_*
Posted 2008-July-21, 06:54
I will double the stayman bid with as little as A10xxx if it appears that the unbid major(s) lead is not going to be a good lead (in other words, if I have no face card in the suit(s)....
#4
Posted 2008-July-21, 07:57
I like KQTxx as a minimal suit strength for doubling, but what do they say of minimum for the total strength of the hand in terms of HCP?
#5
Posted 2008-July-21, 08:09
helene_t, on Jul 21 2008, 05:59 PM, said:
I saw in the Dutch BF magazine that you need at least KQTxx to double 2♣ Stayman (assuming opps play 15-17 1NT). A few days later my p made a lead-directing double (admittedly, it was at the 4-level) on Qxx. Curious to know what people here consider a minimum.
Also, do you ever double on a 4-card? How good does it need to be?
Also, do you ever double on a 4-card? How good does it need to be?
Yes that would be the C suit, but I'd have a bit outside as well. I have had many a juicy xx from highly optimistic doublers. Reading some of the posts on this forum no doubt some posters here would contribute to the Hog retirement fund.
"The King of Hearts a broadsword bears, the Queen of Hearts a rose." W. H. Auden.
#6
Posted 2008-July-21, 08:26
Hmmmm .... so far nobody is voting for the options I gave. It makes sense that with a side entry, it is more attractive to have partner lead clubs. Then again, with values outside clubs I can also tolerate some other lead.
Interesting. So far I have been looking at the suit only. (Of course it's different when opps make a transfer opposite a weak notrump, since then the double serves a constructive purpose).
Interesting. So far I have been looking at the suit only. (Of course it's different when opps make a transfer opposite a weak notrump, since then the double serves a constructive purpose).
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#7
Posted 2008-July-21, 08:26
It depends.
If you absolutely cannot stand the lead of any other suit, you might double 2♣ on QJTxx or KQxxx or KQJx.
I cannot conceive of a circumstance where I would make a lead directing double on Qxx at any level unless my partner had already bid the suit.
If you absolutely cannot stand the lead of any other suit, you might double 2♣ on QJTxx or KQxxx or KQJx.
I cannot conceive of a circumstance where I would make a lead directing double on Qxx at any level unless my partner had already bid the suit.
#8
Posted 2008-July-21, 09:26
I make a lot of excuses to find a lead-director when I absolutely don't want partner to lead what he's going to lead.
Kevin Fay
#9
Posted 2008-July-21, 13:58
what's with all the x's?
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
Page 1 of 1

Help
