[Swammerdam]

Let's consider just auctions where RHO opens 1 of a suit after 0, 1 or 2 passes. What are the requirements for a Takeout Double?
I will describe my own standard. I solicit criticism.

My approach is to ENCOURAGE partner to participate by telling him right away I have support for his suit.
BUT, if I overcall instead of Doubling let him make the opposite inference: I'm probably uninterested in his suit.
(Some BBO'ers with excellent support for my overcalled suit insist on introducing some very mediocre suit of their own, instead of showing support. UGH!)

I distinguish two cases for the 1-level Take-out Double: (A) Three-suiter. (B) Strong hand (i.e. too good for simple overcall)

(A) Three-suiter with singleton in opener's suit.
With 4-4-4-1, double with any 10 hcp or a good-looking 9. 8 hcp may not be quite enough unless it's two Aces.
With 5-4-3-1, treat it similar to 4-4-4-1, perhaps a trifle more conservative. If you're doubling a minor and are 5-3 or 3-5 in the majors whether to double or overcall depends on suit quality.
With 5-4-4-0, treat it as 4-4-4-1. Don't reduce the hcp range: The Double promises defensive values.
(I read an ancient textbook which advised against doubling with a void -- If partner passes for penalties, you won't be able to lead a trump as directed.
I assume we will all agree that advice is VERY obsolete, if it ever had merit at all.)

Just moments ago -- (and one reason I'm starting this thread)-- my partner doubled a first-seat 2♥ opening with 4-0-4-5, two Queens and one King. Can we all agree that was WAY out of line?)

(A) "Three-suiter" with doubleton in opener's suit.
4-4-3-2 isn't really a "three-suiter" but I'll double as long as I have 4 cards in at least one of the unbid major(s).
The hcp requirement increases; instead of a goodish 9, I want a good 11.

With 5-3-3-2, the choice of double, overcall or pass depends on the 5-carder's suit quality and whether it's a major. Just a few days ago, I held
AKQ / K62 / K8752 / 42
RHO opened 1♣ in 3rd suit. I doubled. Show of hands, please -- Is the Double "correct"? I have good support for both majors, especially spades; and the Diamonds are down-right mediocre. Overcalling 1♦ never occurred to me. My partner, who labeled himself "Expert", told me "Overcall when you have five."
But in my style I WANT partner to bid a major and do NOT want him to throw in a nuisance raise of Diamonds at the 2- or 3-level with a doubleton.

With 4-3-3-3 I'll double if the 4-carder is a major and I have 12+ points outside the suit I'm doubling.

All of this is subject to context. A hand that doubles 1♣ may not want to double 1♠ and force partner to make a 2-bid. Doubles can be shaded slightly by a passed hand. Etc.

5-4-2-2 is obviously not a three-suiter. Unless it's a Strong Hand ((B) below) I never double with a doubleton in an unbid major and allow it in a minor only if that doubleton has an honor.

(B) So much for doubling with a "Three-suiter". The other case is a Strong hand, too good for an overcall.
The threshold -- What is the maximum overcall? What is the minimum to Double and then freely bid a new suit? -- may be a good question,
but for the purpose of this thread let me just say that
Even when I double intending to bid a suit on the next round, I will always prefer to have at least Qx in each unbid suit. I want partner to rely on me if he's forced to bid at a high level.

Comments?

[DavidKok]

I think your advice is somewhat old-fashioned, and leaves some points on the table in the long run. However, it's a very solid foundation.

The modern approach is to interfere aggressively, and to reserve a takeout double for all hands that wish to act but cannot take a more descriptive action. As a rule of thumb, if you can overcall cheaply in a five card suit this is preferred to doubling, while if you need to raise the level and/or conceal a 4cM in the process often a takeout double is preferred. However, the true answer is that no rule of thumb will suffice, as the flexible double changes meaning immensely depending on the situation. Lumping 0, 1 and 2 passes before the opening together is already quite inaccurate, but understandably it's good to have some common ground and then later introduce the nuances. The suit the opponents open also matters a great deal, which you pointed out. Be especially wary of having a doubleton in an unbid major, as partner might just raise that.

For me the example hand is a 1♦ overcall and not a double. However, I think in the broader community this is very much considered a style question, and I expect double to find majority support.

Ruling out 5422-type hands, especially (42)(52) hands after the opponents open the other major, goes against modern expert thinking but is a very playable style. Some people play Raptor overcalls and do not have to worry about this hand type so much.

When it comes to the 'too strong' hand type, it's very nice that you want to have at least Qx in each unbid suit. We all want things. What are you going to do when you don't hold those cards? Also, if you're going to double-then-bid anyway, what good is the doubleton in support for partner? I can see the value if you are worried about getting preempted and the bidding being too high to introduce your own suit, but even then you should strain to introduce your suit. The initial double to show strength is quite commital.

[gszes]

The overall concepts seem sound but I feel your HCP requirements for X fail to take into consideration that (on occasion) P will let the double go for penalty. I try hard to make sure I think I have at least 3 defensive tricks in any auction where it is feasible for p to convert my x. If I cannot meet this requirement, I am going to look to overcall rather than x. That means your first example hand I would x and your P x of 2h was well short of my requirement to x. So over a 1C opening Axx Axx Axxxx xx is sufficent to X
while KQJ QJx Kxxxx xx I would prefer a 1d overcall (I KNOW this is not compatible with your philosophy).


This statement only applies to the situation specified in the problem. It does not apply to other situations where more information has been obtained.

[mw64ahw]

It may be useful to read the notes available on The Overcall Structure as this provides some thoughts along the same vein, but coing at the issues from a different angle.

[Swammerdam]

Thanks for both comments! And thanks for having the grace to accept that my approach is a matter of philosophy and style, rather than simple ignorance!
Nevertheless I have learned from you that I must modify my style significantly when playing with strangers at BBO.

gszes, on 2025-November-21, 17:14, said:

... (on occasion) P will let the double go for penalty. I try hard to make sure I think I have at least 3 defensive tricks in any auction where it is feasible for p to convert my x. If I cannot meet this requirement, I am going to look to overcall rather than x. That means your first example hand I would x and your P x of 2h was well short of my requirement to x. So over a 1C opening Axx Axx Axxxx xx is sufficent to X
while KQJ QJx Kxxxx xx I would prefer a 1d overcall (I KNOW this is not compatible with your philosophy).

I've thought that Double, like an Opening bid, promises only 2 (or 2½) tricks, and/or partner should not double (or penalty pass) unless expecting Down TWO.

When I overcall (or otherwise emphasize a single suit) I want partner to feel free to raise with Jx if he has no better option.
KT9xx -- ok. K8xxx -- Ugh.

[DavidKok]

Double does not promise any specific number of tricks for me. It is flexible, and can be quite weak.

I'm happy to not have suit quality requirements for my competitive bidding. I'd rather not conceal shape.

[mycroft]

Reading the Overcall Structure is handing a 17th century archer a loaded pistol. Might be amazing, very high probability for self-harm.

The *theory* is interesting. The structure fits together well, if you choose to ignore "standard" completely and switch over completely.(*) In particular, the *explanation of the theory* is very good, providing "ways to think" that can be used to solidify a standard structure as well.

But, despite me and you and at least one former BoD member and his son, there's a reason "standard" is standard and O/C structure is - not.

(*) Well, I have found there are some parts you can take without needing the rest of the structure. But again, you need to *already know* how to evaluate bidding system dependencies before you can reliably determine that - with C++ level footgun the most likely result without that knowledge.

[bluenikki]

gszes, on 2025-November-21, 17:14, said:

The overall concepts seem sound but I feel your HCP requirements for X fail to take into consideration that (on occasion) P will let the double go for penalty.

I guess penalty passes must be more common nowadays.

I grew up in a school where QJxxxx in trumps were required. So the primary meaning of double for me is, "I believe we can compete effectively in your best/longest suit. (But it's you who must do the competing.)"

[Huibertus]

For me informing partner of a 5 card suit always takes preference over a take out double with 1 exception, I might select a take out double if my 5 card is a minor, is ♥ AND there is no way I'm strong enough for a second round take out double, in such a case if suit strength is not a real factor (for the lead in my 5 card) I'll consider the take out double. In all other cases 5 card first, assuming the opponents raise their opening suit, I'll have a take out double second round to complete the picture. If you have bid a 5 card, and you have play in another suit, due to a fit, often partner will be informing you of this fact with a responsive double over the bid of the advancing hand. So not often will you miss finding a fit, but it does happen, you can't have it all.