[paulg]

Love All; Matchpoints

(1♣) Pass (Pass) 1♦
(2♣) Dbl

What does double show here?

Paul

[helene_t]

If I remember correctly, last time this came up in IMP, Dutch juniors voted for t/o while Dutch grown-ups voted for penalty.

[han]

We play responsive doubles here.

[FrancesHinden]

My 'rules' for doubles say that this is take-out. On this auction, probably a hand not quite strong enough for an original take-out double.

[Tomi2]

last time this came up in a similar case (1♦-p-p-1♠-2♦-p-)
i was happy to have agreed to play no penalties on low-level contracts. that time i had some 13 hcp with 4 hearts 4 clubs 3 dias and 2 spades,
in the original post everything else then PEN is ok to me, some decent points with good majors or real points with no bid, say 3-4-2-4 with 12 or so. still expect my partner to run... with AQT87 in clubs i still wait for partners T/O in the reopening seat, since he will have club shortnes and probably one major to bid a double with his hand

[P_Marlowe]

t/o.

With tolerance for partners suit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ArtK78]

Without any special agreements, this is a penalty double.

That explains the inability to act over 1♣.

[jdonn]

Standard undiscussed is penalty, but it's one of those cases where there is a very good case to be made for either interpretation, so make your own agreement.

[Cascade]

ArtK78, on Nov 20 2008, 06:24 AM, said:

Without any special agreements, this is a penalty double.

That explains the inability to act over 1♣.

I don't agree with this logic.

There is no law against having 8-10 hcp with some length in both majors. I would have thought that this was a reasonably common hand type for this auction.

That would make takeout a useful agreement.

[rogerclee]

As other mentioned this is definitely penalty without discussion. I think this is better than a takeout double for two reasons:

1) It only gains to play this double is takeout when we are exactly 44 in the majors and could not make a takeout double of 1♣. Certainly there are lots of hands that fit this description, but the utility of having a responsive double here is less when we didn't double or overcall over 1♣.

2) When you pick up a penalty double, the gains will be much higher than the gains from being able to make a responsive double.

I think responsive would only make sense if the hand type turned out to be much more frequent.

I should add that if the balance was 1M instead of 1♦, then it would be very clear to play this double is penalty.

[whereagles]

According to Robson/Segal, it's take-out. (Ok ok that book is 15 years old )

[awm]

Agree with Josh Donn. I prefer takeout/responsive here, for three major reasons:

(1) Takeout is, in fact, much more frequent than a penalty double. This is especially true because many situations where I have club length and partner has shortness in clubs, partner might've doubled instead of bidding 1♦.

(2) If I have a penalty double and pass, partner will often balance with a (clearly takeout oriented) double which I can then convert. If I have a takeout double and pass, partner (with club length) is almost always passing it out.

(3) I'm not a huge fan of off-shape takeout doubles (without a lot of extras). So there are a fair number of hands where some people on these forums might've doubled 1♣ (i.e. 4423 12-count) whereas I would pass. This further increases the value of the takeout double.

[whereagles]

Actually, these days this auction for take out should be very rare. I can picture something like

Qxxx
AQxx
x
Kxxx

but if it were

Qxxx
AQxx
Kx
xxx

I'm pretty sure some would dbl 1♣ for take out.

[Lobowolf]

helene_t, on Nov 19 2008, 09:42 AM, said:

If I remember correctly, last time this came up in IMP, Dutch juniors voted for t/o while Dutch grown-ups voted for penalty.

Do juniors play penalty doubles?

[gwnn]

You'd be surprised, sometimes when juniors bid game, they go down

[655321]

Penalties for me.

[jdonn]

awm, on Nov 19 2008, 02:55 PM, said:

Agree with Josh Donn.

Not really, I didn't say it but I prefer penalty.

[awm]

Another funny point about this auction, is that I know a lot of people (Justin Lall for example) who will respond to 1m pretty light. This is especially true on hands with a five-card major.

So while it's possible that responder is totally broke to pass 1♣, there are a lot of hands with something like 2-4 hcp (much more common than zero counts) which would pass with balanced shape but would bid with something like a 5431. So responder's pass increases the odds that he holds 2+♣, which means that (assuming opener has 6+♣) the declaring side is extremely likely to have an 8+ card fit there.

This further reduces the odds of penalty double.

[jdonn]

Actually I agree with you that penalty is more useful the worse your opponents and less useful the better your opponents. The reason you mention is hardly a factor, it has more to do with some people out there who make bids like this 2♣ on abysmal hands.

[awm]

jdonn, on Nov 19 2008, 07:23 PM, said:

Actually I agree with you that penalty is more useful the worse your opponents and less useful the better your opponents. The reason you mention is hardly a factor, it has more to do with some people out there who make bids like this 2♣ on abysmal hands.

"If the opponents' convention card includes stolen bid doubles or mini-roman 2♦, then double in this auction is penalty. Otherwise it is takeout."