[mikl_plkcc]

There was a disaster yesterday in the following auction:
(1♠) - / - (4♠) - /
(/) - X

I made the double with the hand ♠AT6 ♥KQJ2 ♦K87 ♣863. Our agreement about doubles was that we played negative doubles up to 4♠, but nothing else, as it was our first time playing together.

Partner took it out with ♠2 ♥T653 ♦AQ6 ♣K9742, and we ended up at 5♥x-3, a zero on that board, while 4♠x would end up -1 (it would be a top if the double was left in).

What do you think about this double? Does it suggest taking out or penalty? I was thinking that because I didn't make the double after 1♠, it would more likely be penalty rather than takeout.

[hrothgar]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-30, 15:01, said:

What do you think about this double?

ill conceived... That's a nice polite euphemism...

If you feel the need to bid with this hand, better to start with a double directly over 1!S rather than suddenly deciding that you need to bid at the 4 level

> I was thinking that because I didn't make the double after 1♠, it would more likely be penalty rather than takeout.

In this case, you want to have a hand that is confident of setting 4!S

!S AKQ
!H xxxx
!D Ax
!C xxxx

However, even here, there is a very real risk that partner is going to get confused and pull

Sometimes, like it or not, your best option is to just sit back and acknowledge that the opponents might have gotten to a good contract and that your best option is to accept the loss

FWIW, the following hand generated a fair amount of discussion at the table today

https://www.bridgeba...C3%7Cmc%7C10%7C

Both regarding the initial double and the decision to sit for it

[foobar]

hrothgar, on 2025-March-30, 15:20, said:

FWIW, the following hand generated a fair amount of discussion at the table today

https://www.bridgeba...C3%7Cmc%7C10%7C

Both regarding the initial double and the decision to sit for it

I agreed with both the actions on the posted hand, but let's see what others think about the pass: https://bridgewinner...-2-8aof6rxinr/.

[hrothgar]

foobar, on 2025-March-30, 15:52, said:

I agreed with both the actions on the posted hand, but let's see what others think about the pass: https://bridgewinner...-2-8aof6rxinr/.

I think that the double is reasonable and I definitely agree with the pass

(I was opener and I think that I had the easiest decision)

[P_Marlowe]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-30, 15:01, said:

There was a disaster yesterday in the following auction:
(1♠) - / - (4♠) - /
(/) - X

I made the double with the hand ♠AT6 ♥KQJ2 ♦K87 ♣863. Our agreement about doubles was that we played negative doubles up to 4♠, but nothing else, as it was our first time playing together.

Partner took it out with ♠2 ♥T653 ♦AQ6 ♣K9742, and we ended up at 5♥x-3, a zero on that board, while 4♠x would end up -1 (it would be a top if the double was left in).

What do you think about this double? Does it suggest taking out or penalty? I was thinking that because I didn't make the double after 1♠, it would more likely be penalty rather than takeout.

#1 if you want to enter the auction do it at once, it would not be the worst T/O
#2 why should the double be T/O, you did not have a T/O the round before, why did he take it out,
4 tricks are simpler to find as 11
#3 Not much, and for sure the X is penalty oriented, but you are lacking hard fast tricks

[P_Marlowe]

hrothgar, on 2025-March-30, 16:19, said:

I think that the double is reasonable and I definitely agree with the pass

(I was opener and I think that I had the easiest decision)

I think the auction is ok, ... I assume 1H was limited, otherwise 4S makes
no sense.

[akwoo]

Yes, it definitely is penalty - if you couldn't bid over 1♠ there is no way you have a takeout double of 4♠.

It's definitely a risky double but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a good double at MPs. (Of course, if you're known to make these kinds of doubles opponents might start bidding 4♠ on better hands, which makes the double worse...)

As for hrothgar's hand - I definitely agree with the pass, but I don't know about the double. This just illustrates how much of an advantage minority bidding systems have - I'm in a regular Precision partnership, but I still don't have enough experience to have any decent sense how often the 4♠ bid has good defensive values (and is presumably expecting to make), and hence what the odds on that double being good are.

[helene_t]

Yes, what Akwoo says.

It is worth discussing from what level such doubles become penalty. I think my preference would would be 3♦, i.e.
(1♣)-p-(3♣)-p
(p)-X
is takeout, while
(1♦)-p-(3♦)-p
(p)-X
is penalty. But I haven't discussed it with any partner.

Hrothgar's example is different, here the double is whatever you have agreed a double of a 4♠ opening would be. Most play t/o though 5♦ or so but some only though 4♥.

[mikl_plkcc]

akwoo, on 2025-March-31, 00:17, said:

Yes, it definitely is penalty - if you couldn't bid over 1♠ there is no way you have a takeout double of 4♠.

It's definitely a risky double but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a good double at MPs. (Of course, if you're known to make these kinds of doubles opponents might start bidding 4♠ on better hands, which makes the double worse...)

As for hrothgar's hand - I definitely agree with the pass, but I don't know about the double. This just illustrates how much of an advantage minority bidding systems have - I'm in a regular Precision partnership, but I still don't have enough experience to have any decent sense how often the 4♠ bid has good defensive values (and is presumably expecting to make), and hence what the odds on that double being good are.

Yes, I was playing matchpoints. At IMPs it would be a clear pass for me as I was not 100% confident in setting them.

[bluenikki]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-March-30, 15:01, said:

There was a disaster yesterday in the following auction:
(1♠) - / - (4♠) - /
(/) - X

I made the double with the hand ♠AT6 ♥KQJ2 ♦K87 ♣863. Our agreement about doubles was that we played negative doubles up to 4♠, but nothing else, as it was our first time playing together.

Partner took it out with ♠2 ♥T653 ♦AQ6 ♣K9742, and we ended up at 5♥x-3, a zero on that board, while 4♠x would end up -1 (it would be a top if the double was left in).

What do you think about this double? Does it suggest taking out or penalty? I was thinking that because I didn't make the double after 1♠, it would more likely be penalty rather than takeout.

I can't imagine not doubling 1♠. Good hands pass over an opening suit bid only with massive duplication in the trump suit.

Doubling 4♠ after passing would be QJTxx in spades and two side aces: non-transferable trump tricks.