All News

Trying to have your Cake…and Eat it too!

It is difficult for newish players to grasp the concept of re-opening doubles, an important part of playing negative rather than penalty doubles when an opponent overcalls. It is generally accepted that the negative double approach is better. However, players must be alert to the fact that their partner can be waiting for your re-opening double in order to penalise the opponent. Therefore, double back in in the "pass-out" seat, if you can.

One issue with reopening doubles is how unbalanced can reopener be to double in the pass-out seat? It is generally accepted that it is not a good idea to have a void in the overcaller’s suit as you cannot help partner by leading the suit through declarer… but what about the hand we gave you yesterday. Would you reopen with a double or the only other sensible action, 2?

 

What does our panel think?

Firmly in the 2 camp is Peter Newell:

Newell “2: Given its my best suit, it is time to bid it.  Yes, Double could easily be right, but I have minimal defence and the opponents are not vul. So, there will be times when partner passes and they make, or are only 1 down and we can make part-score….if the opponents were vulnerable or were known to overcall wildly, double would be more tempting…though partner will not be expecting AKQxx for a reopening double which increases the risk of misjudgement.

Nick Jacob has some misgivings about his action:

Jacob “Double: I think people cater to the trap pass too aggressively in the pass-out seat. 2 is usually more effective when partner doesn't have a trap and can work better when partner has a marginal trap. Maybe we get 140 in our heart partial and only 100 off them, or 420 instead of 300 etc. Double vs 2 can easily be a wash when partner doesn't trap pass, though.       A 2 preference or RHO competing to 3 are not unlikely.

However, when partner has a clear trap, we will likely do better to double. How often does partner have a trap here? I think it's very likely. Our defensive prospects are not great, but we do have a trump to push through and we're not a dead minimum by any stretch. On a total misfit, we probably exchange a plus for a minus by bidding 2. 

 (Also, I don't buy any argument that 2 implies a fifth heart, before anyone suggests it!)”

No-one did, Nick but there is a strong chance your hand is distributional. Matt Brown is another who doubles:

Brown “Double: I think I have adequate defence to double and have partner sit it (if he is waiting).

If he isn't waiting and bids, 3 it is probably fine.  If he bids 2, we probably should be playing in 2 but, oh well.”

And one more to even the score:

Cornell “2: I guess partner could be trapping but if he is not and he bids 3, I am the one who is trapped! 3 after that would be a big overbid.”

We will return to Michael’s prediction in a minute. Firstly, our fifth panellist, Patrick Carter, has been somewhat busy recently as many of you would have noticed and thus left answering to Julie:

Julie Atkinson “2: My general rule with a doubleton in an unbid suit is to consider how happy I am if partner bids that suit, when deciding whether to bid, pass or double.

With 10 cards in the majors, a high probability of a spade lead if 2x is passed out, I am really loathe to make the reopening double. So, I will bid 2.”

 What happened?

The panel have highlighted the problems of when your partner passes for penalties or when they do not have a penalty pass. Against 2x, you will have the wrong suit led (spades) while when, as was the case, partner was not passing 2x, then the problem was how to stop partner bidding:

 

The above was the auction which occurred and which fulfilled some of our panellists’ fears if one had made a re-opening double. We had Julie’s fear of partner bidding our doubleton realised. Do they always have such a good suit when they do?

Would you have been happy passing that contract had East passed? The answer is you should because had you bid 3 now (surely, this time, a 5-card suit, Nick?)), partner will expect you to be rather stronger. East’s delayed raise to 3 might seem strange though they might have not been too comfortable bidding this a round earlier with their spade holding, though nothing much seemed to have changed. Certainly, East saved the day for their side with 9 tricks being available in diamonds and 10 in clubs.

After the auction given, who could blame North raising to 4? Nevertheless, 4 is close to making. After A lead, West has no obvious switch and might continue diamonds. Declarer just has to attack clubs. East must hold up one round. Indeed, a third round of clubs promotes the J as a fourth trick for the defence. However, since it was not falling doubleton, there was no way South could reach dummy’s clubs. ..and the contract should fail.

Many sold out to 3 on this board. Had South bid 2, it would seem that East would compete to 3, leaving North to hope or expect a 5-card heart suit (or that partner plays 4-3 fits very well!) to find a raise to the top scoring (for N/S) 3 contract.

 The price of penalising

We all love extracting good penalties when an overcall backfires, as sometimes they do. Occasionally, as Matt Brown alluded to, the reward of “ having the cake” on several occasions will mean a rather awkward auction when your partner was not awaiting your double. Perhaps the above hand is the price we pay for all those 500’s and 800’s..or maybe we should have bid 2 in the first place.

So to tomorrow:

 

You are playing Pairs. Partner leads the A. Which card do you play to trick 1?

See you Friday.

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items