[Shugart23]

I am doing a write-up on the topic of doubles for my son, and I know lots of players use the double as stolen bid..eg Parner opens 1NT and opponents overcall 2C or 2D or 2H and then you double to indicate that you intended to make the Stayman or Jacoby bid. I know it is common in club play, but is this the best treatment? For those that would or do use the double for stolen bid in this situation, then I would assume that your partner needs to consider whether your pass is a trap pass.

I'm interested in seeing comments on this topic

[DavidKok]

I think this is not a good treatment, nowhere close to being best. Rather, takeout doubles by both hands and natural NF bids at the 2-level, along with some flavour of Lebensohl starting at 2NT, is more effective. A case can be made for stolen bid doubles/system on over 1NT-(X)-? and/or 1NT-(2♣)-?, though even there I think we can do better by exploiting the pressure on fourth seat and the information the enemy action has given us.

Personally I've mostly seen these stolen bid doubles in the beginner courses, sorry. They are easy, if a new player learns a whole system of artificial bids over 1NT it is tempting to let them use it as often as possible. But I do not think it is very good.


The topic of doubles is interesting and complicated. I tallied the different types of double I played in a partnership once, out of curiousity. I should have the list somewhere, it had 14 different entries sorted in 4 categories, if I'm not mistaken. From a theoretical point of view the double is very special as it is a call that increases the amount of bidding space, rather than decreasing it. So it makes sense to try to use it for many purposes in many different situations.

[P_Marlowe]

 Shugart23, on 2024-May-05, 08:15, said:

I am doing a write-up on the topic of doubles for my son, and I know lots of players use the double as stolen bid..eg Parner opens 1NT and opponents overcall 2C or 2D or 2H and then you double to indicate that you intended to make the Stayman or Jacoby bid. I know it is common in club play, but is this the best treatment? For those that would or do use the double for stolen bid in this situation, then I would assume that your partner needs to consider whether your pass is a trap pass.

I'm interested in seeing comments on this topic

It only works after a 2C intervenion, after a 2D intervention, how do you search for a 4-4 in either major?
And it is not getting better, if we replace 2D with a 2H intervention, now how do you introduce your weak 5 card heart suit,
or how do you serach for a 4-4 in either major?

You know, how to deal with a intervention, if you open with a suit, you use X as T/O, why not do the same after a 1NT opening,
stolen bids are claimed to be simpler, when in fact they make it more complex, and this includes memory load.

[pescetom]

stub

[pescetom]

 P_Marlowe, on 2024-May-05, 11:47, said:

It only works after a 2C intervenion

I agree with this, but quite like double as non GF Stayman after a natural 2C intervention.
That leaves you free to play all bids as Rubensohl.

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2024-May-05, 10:02, said:

The topic of doubles is interesting and complicated. I tallied the different types of double I played in a partnership once, out of curiousity. I should have the list somewhere, it had 14 different entries sorted in 4 categories, if I'm not mistaken. From a theoretical point of view the double is very special as it is a call that increases the amount of bidding space, rather than decreasing it. So it makes sense to try to use it for many purposes in many different situations.

Those truly in Expert class will probably have difficulty remembering how difficult it was to figure out all those different doubles. This week I had the honour (I regard it as such) of playing with an intelligent total beginner, keen to learn, and soon found myself in difficulty explaining in simple terms what double would mean in every situation. "Let's play it as always takeout!" she suggested

[blackshoe]

Always takeout (with some exceptions) is what, iirc, Mats Nilsland recommended in Absolute Doubles.

[apollo1201]

The system played by opps, esp the natural or non natural aspect of the overcall is very important as well.

If opps overcall in transfer, you probably do not want to show that you as well have 5 cds in the suit!

But as David said, stolen bid is easy but not optimal. I share w/ him most of what I play here: NF natural at the 2 level, transfers starting at 2NT, with X a flexible take out call, and cue of opp suit as 3-suited.

[smerriman]

Stolen bid doubles are always one of the highest-voted options in all of the 'worst ever conventions' polls I've seen.

[mycroft]

I interfere aggressively against (strong) 1NT, especially if my partner has forced me to play DONT. It only works well when you D O's NT, so you have to push it hard or you lose to its clear downsides.

But if you tell me you can't double for penalty? (or for takeout - pairs who play that have good rules for their protecting reopening doubles. Pairs who play Stolen Bid - don't, usually). Well, now I can bypass "aggressive" and go right to "foolhardy". If you're telling me you can't punish a bad intervention, why shouldn't I?

I do give a pass for "ignoring" 2♣ overcalls, no matter their meaning, and double is Stayman and systems on. In fact, I play that with my regular partners (except of course that one of them, double isn't Stayman, because We Don't Play Stayman).

[mikeh]

I agree with the criticisms of stolen bid doubles. I’d heard about them but had never seen anyone use them until I started wasting time playing robots on BBO.

Bidding over interference can be complicated for serious pairs…in one partnership we had a (long) table of how we dealt with virtually every known convention. These days, it’s simpler (same partner, different methods), but I promise you, our simple methods are infinitely better than stolen bid doubles…other than x of 2C, using x as stayman unless 2C showed both majors, in which case it announces ownership of the hand and willingness to cooperate in penalizing them (but not by any means committing to doing so).

I wouldn’t say stolen bids are ‘the worst’….I’d reserve that for the wonderful mini-Roman, lol. But they’re on a short list.

If one was complaining a list of ‘doubles’, I suppose one should list stolen bids but I strongly suggest doing so while saying ‘they’re not popular amongst better players, so it’s probably a bad idea to use them unless playing with GIB robots….who don’t bid very well at the best of times’.

Fwiw, here’s what we play, by way of doubles

Takeout

Negative

Penalty

Hand ownership

Do something intelligent partner (aka action doubles or optional doubles)

Lead directing

Sacrifice suggesting (x of a splinter at fav vul for us)

Support

Responsive

Showing keycards after interference over partner’s keycard ask

Transfers (1C (x) 1D is hearts, etc)

Lead inhibiting. (After we preempt, a double by preemptor of a cuebid of his suit asks for the lead of something else)

Conventional over a strong 1N opening by opps. 1N. (Several versions, currently shows 4M and longer minor, but other uses are available)

Weakness showing if our strong 2C is overcalled (actually we recently switched to x promising values but I think showing a bust is still more popular)

X as keycard: if an opp bids an unusual 4N in a power auction our way, x is keycard

Snapdragon (if I overcall an opps’s suit opening, LHO bids the third suit, x by partner shows the 4th suit with tolerance for my suit).

Game tries (say 1S (2H) 2S (3H) x isn’t suggesting defending…it’s saying I’m interested in game but can’t bid it myself’, allowing 3Scto simply be competitive)

Also, we do have some relay sequences and x of interference after a relay is sometimes a relay response

I think that’s about it for doubles, though I wouldn’t be surprised if I’ve missed one. Redoubles aren’t quite as varied, lol. That’s 18 different (tho with much overlap) doubles. Stolen Bid Doubles are not included.

[smerriman]

 mikeh, on 2024-May-05, 21:37, said:

I agree with the criticisms of stolen bid doubles. I'd heard about them but had never seen anyone use them until I started wasting time playing robots on BBO.
..
If one was complaining a list of 'doubles', I suppose one should list stolen bids but I strongly suggest doing so while saying 'they're not popular amongst better players, so it's probably a bad idea to use them unless playing with GIB robots... who don't bid very well at the best of times'.

I'm not sure which robots you were playing with, but GIB has never played stolen bid doubles; it plays lebensohl. It does appear to turn up in a remarkable number of BBO human profiles though.

[mikeh]

 smerriman, on 2024-May-05, 22:09, said:

I'm not sure which robots you were playing with, but GIB has never played stolen bid doubles; it plays lebensohl. It does appear to turn up in a remarkable number of BBO human profiles though.

I’ve played solitaire and some @cbl robot events on bbo. I’ve many times seen 1N (2D) x with x described as hearts. Also, similarly, the robot doubles a 2H overcall as a spade transfer.

Lebensohl doesn’t apply here, so I think at least one of us is confused, lol. Trust me, when discussing robot bridge, I’m constantly confused.

[smerriman]

 mikeh, on 2024-May-06, 00:03, said:

I've played solitaire and some @cbl robot events on bbo. I've many times seen 1N (2D) x with x described as hearts. Also, similarly, the robot doubles a 2H overcall as a spade transfer.

Lebensohl doesn't apply here, so I think at least one of us is confused, lol. Trust me, when discussing robot bridge, I'm constantly confused.

Isn't this the standard situation for when lebensohl applies - partner opens 1N and the opponents overcall? You must be mixing this up with something else somehow; neither of those definitions has ever been part of GIB. Double of 2♥ is described as takeout. Double of 2♦ (which it interprets as showing both majors via Capp, since it only has a defense to its own system) is indeed not the best, but is definitely not described as showing hearts; it plays it as invitational with stoppers in the opponents' majors.

[helene_t]

I don't think Stolen Bid is so bad, technically. Making the 1NT opener declare is much more important after an intervention than without, and actually when playing a weak NT I prefer to play transfers when opps overcall but not in uncontested auctions or when they double. Playing strong NT I prefer some kind of transfers in all situations except
1NT-(4♦)-?
and higher.

I suspect that Stolen Bid has a bad reputation not because it's inherently bad but because it tends to be played by players who haven't worked out the details or are just not very good players.

There are some issues, though:
- It's not enough just to agree that we play "Stolen Bid". You also need some kind of substitute for bids that are also "stolen" because they are below opps' bid. For example, if opps bid 2♦ and you agree that X is hearts, you need some kind of Stayman bid. You can agree that 3♣ is Stayman, of course, but then you can't Stayman with invitational hands. For that reason you may decide that that negative doubles are better, then you can double with (a.o.) the invitational Stayman hands.
- Many opps play artifical minor suit overcalls. So for example, if 2♦ is cappeletti/hamilton (showing both majors) there's probably a better us of double than as transfer to hearts
- Opener can almost never convert a stolen bid double by passing it because the stolen bid double can be made with a hand with no defense at all, and opener won't often have six defensive tricks in their own hand. With negative doubles it is often agreed that the double should show enough defensive strength for opener to convert with four trumps. So the stolen bid doublers miss some opportunities to defend doubled.
- Because no teachers or good players recommend stolen bid, you won't find any textbooks that describe them and you won't get competent help about how to work out the details on forums like this one.

I think that last point is the most important reason for not playing stolen bid. Other than possibly after
1NT-(2♣)-?
But then again, if their 2♣ is Landy you probably want 2♦ by you to be natural.

In one partnership I played stolen bids (including trasnfers that go one level higher if necessary) but it's a bit of a mess. We used to play 2NT as transfer to diamonds, so over intervention 3♣ would be stayman, but when we changed to 3♣ showing diamonds it wasn't clear whether 3♣ over intervention was diamonds or stayman. What we could do was to play transfer to their suit as stayman but I am afraid if I bid 3♣ over intervention partner would think it was still Stayman. This is the danger of playing conventions that are not described anywhere.

Anyway, the scheme was this:
- double means you would have bid what opp's bid
- any bid below opps' bid is substituded with the next level, e.g., if they bid 2♠, 3♣ is stayman and 3♦ is transfer
- 2nt is always natural (unless you would play 2nt as something else without intervention, in that case it keeps that meaning)
- bids that are not stolen, retain their meaning, e.g., after their 2♦, 2♥ is trasnfer to spades etc
- a transfer to their suit is stayman
- against Landy, dbl is clubs, 2♦ is natural, 2♥ is also natural (!) while 2♠ is transfer to clubs as it would be without intervention. With clubs, you should transfer if you always want to compete to the 3-level, but double if you think the 3-level might be too high. Dbl is also lead directing
- against DONT (2♥ shows both majors) I don't think this makes sense so you will have to work out something better. Maybe double if both minors with convertible values.
- This all applies when opps overcall 3♣ or lower. Against a 3♦ overcall you could play x as negative and invert 3♥/3♠, but we haven't discussed this.

[Shugart23]

Thanks guys and gals. I've never used stolen bid , but wanted to throw it out here to see what good players say. I'm going to tell my son we play reverse lebensohl inn, although I am going to contemplate stolen bid when opponents overcall 2C (with trap pass possibility). I appreciate the list of the uses of doubles supplied. I have described to him, so far, about 7 different situations of where doubles show up, and their meanings and I know his head is spinning a little ! Appreciate the input, again

[hrothgar]

I used to plane in the Keohane Individual in MA

To this day, I am traumatized by the words "And you play stolen bid doubles, don't you dearie"

[blackshoe]

Vs. NT interference I'd rather play Rubensohl than Lebensohl.