[1eyedjack]

Scoring: IMP

..E......S.....W......N
1N(1)..P...2♦(2)..2♠
X(3)

(1) 12-14
(2) Normal transfer
(3) See poll

---

[Pict]

Double.

Unless I'm misreading the post, penalty double looks right, and I can't imagine why that would not be my agreement.

[mgoetze]

Could some of the people who dislike penalty doubles tell us what they would consider a sensible alternative treatment?

[gnasher]

mgoetze, on Aug 20 2010, 11:41 PM, said:

Could some of the people who dislike penalty doubles tell us what they would consider a sensible alternative treatment?

A maximum with 3-card support.

But I don't "dislike" penalty doubles - I just don't get dealt them very often. On this occasion, for example, I haven't been dealt one.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2010-August-20, 16:49

[helene_t]

I think this should be a support double. A 12-14 hand can't have a penalty dbl opposite a partner that has promised 0 points. Obviously it should als say something about the spade holding, so that responder can judge whether to bid 3. So I think this hand qualifies (with 3-card support and poor defense just bid 3♥) but I wouldn't call it a penalty double. With only two hearts I would pass regardless of my spade holding.

[mikeh]

This reminds me of playing with a very good Canadian player, Barry Harper...one of the fastest minds at the table I have ever seen. He loves to live on the edge, and I don't...I think that is why he is so much better than me at mps. Anyway, because he knew I am a grinder, not an intuitive player, he agreed, when we played a regional open pairs years ago, to stay in the boat. We had a good game 1st session, but he told me he couldn't play that way for two sessions and he was going to let rip the 2nd session.

He opened a 10-12 1N, I passed, 4th chair balanced 2♠ and he made a penalty double! I had 5 or 6 more hcp than I had promised, so we had almost half the deck and he had only 2 fewer spades than balancer did...and she misplayed by 2 tricks and we were +200 for a top.

I can't play that way and never want to.

Doubling with this hand smacks of that kind of approach.

A red opp of any calibre has a GOOD reason for bidding into a live auction. I don't double this kind of bid unless I can beat it in my own hand.....which I can't. BTW, for the doublers...what are you planning to lead? And what are you playing partner to hold?

I do think double is penalty, just in case I ever open 1N with AQ109x Ax Kxx xx and have this auction...I wouldn't be certain I was beating the contract, but I'd risk the double (and think myself daring for doing so ).

[mikeh]

helene_t, on Aug 20 2010, 06:00 PM, said:

I think this should be a support double. A 12-14 hand can't have a penalty dbl opposite a partner that has promised 0 points. Obviously it should als say something about the spade holding, so that responder can judge whether to bid 3. So I think this hand qualifies (with 3-card support and poor defense just bid 3♥) but I wouldn't call it a penalty double. With only two hearts I would pass regardless of my spade holding.

So if partner holds xx Jxxxx xxx xxx he has a choice of incineration in 3♥ or annihilation in 2♠? At imps, red?

There he was metaphorically mopping his brow with relief when LHO rescued him from a moderate minus in 2♥ and you have just jumped back into the fire, clutching him to you as you did.

[helene_t]

So you'd just pass whenever you don't have 4-card support, Mike? Fair enough, that works when p is broke.

[rogerclee]

In a national pair game I recently held, at all red:

K76xx Kx KQx KQx

and opened a strong NT and at some tables the bidding went something like

1N P 2D 3S
?

And the question posed was, can you double with 5 trumps and only 2 hearts. Some people did, but were disappointed to learn that 3S was completely cold, they had 6 spade tricks and three side aces to cash.

So the moral of the story is, don't double with these kinds of hands, it doesn't end well.

[aguahombre]

helene_t, on Aug 20 2010, 05:22 PM, said:

So you'd just pass whenever you don't have 4-card support, Mike? Fair enough, that works when p is broke.

and often when he isn't broke

[mikeh]

helene_t, on Aug 20 2010, 06:22 PM, said:

So you'd just pass whenever you don't have 4-card support, Mike? Fair enough, that works when p is broke.

and when he's not....maybe he'll bid? Double by him would be co-operative, 2N takeout and so on. Once in a while they will steal, and a 6 imp swing can hurt, but if we can make something at the 3-level and can't bid it, they usually won't make at the 2-level and vice versa, so we're more commonly talking about a 1 or 2 imp swing when we 'go wrong', while the support double, when wrong is a nightmare.

[FrancesHinden]

I play double here as showing both majors (typically 4-3). If partner has a 0-count with 5 hearts we might be in trouble, but usually it's right to act.

At the 3-level I play double as penalties.

This is one auction where the strength of the NT opening perhaps should have some influence on your agreements.

[helene_t]

Thanks Frances, I knew you would defend me against Mike

[mcphee]

I just can not understand why anyone would want to dble really. I would think we should be delighted to have slipped past an auction at most tables that will start 1S and H may never get mentioned. The need to continue to compete once you have already made a limited bid with a minimum hand is unilateral.

[gnasher]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 21 2010, 10:25 AM, said:

I play double here as showing both majors (typically 4-3).

Who do you play a 12-14 notrump with?

[1eyedjack]

Thanks for the thoughts. My tuppence-worth:

Low-level penalty doubles usually give partner some lattitude to remove them. Particularly here, if responder has a zero-count then he knows the contract is making, so doubler need not worry about making a penalty double for fear of its being left in opposite such a hand. At what point responder should be expected to respect it is another question, of course.

It does seem sensible that any action by opener other than pass should show a fit for Hearts, to protect against responder having a bust (and there are some hands with a fit which would pass, as well). In that context there are several bids available to show Heart support, which tends to up the justification for double showing an interest in penalties. That said, if responder wanted to make a penalty double he will not thank you for taking some action other than pass or double, in order to show some Heart support. That said, if you have a Heart fit, the frequency of wanting to double for penalties at the 2 level diminishes somewhat.

There may be more incentive for the double to be penalties at matchpoints, and I for one dislike making two many system agreements dependent on the type of scoring, even if it means that a bid gets underused under certain conditions.

I was kibitzing this hand in a tourney the other day, and this auction was triplated (ie at 3 tables) (everyone was playing 12-14 opener), but each time there was further bidding. Whether the agreements had been discussed in advance at each table I can only speculate.