[Double !]

mikestar, on Feb 10 2006, 02:29 PM, said:

Double is resonable, but doubling 1♥ as a passed hand is much better--partner won't be tempted to leave it in at the one level, he will know you have some values and good shape and can push them with the right hand and sell to 2♥ undoubled with the wrong hand.

I could be wrong, but I believe that it might have been better to have competed earlier with this hand (double 1H).
If the opps have 8 hearts between them, and you have one, then (math majors please confirm) partner rates to have 4 hearts. I don't know what the percentages are that having one 4-card suit might reduce the chance of having a second 4-card suit, but...
P can be hung if you balance at the 2-level when you could have competed at the 1-level and P is 4-trip-3.
As I think about this, I am thinking that, yes, I want to have the classic shape when making an immediate competitive (takeout) double but that, on this auction, having 2 or 3 cards in the opps suit might increase the chances that our partnership has a viable 8+-card fit. Yo no sais/ je ne sais pas.
Interesting topic

DHL

[Winstonm]

Double !, on Feb 10 2006, 09:11 PM, said:

mikestar, on Feb 10 2006, 02:29 PM, said:

Double is resonable, but doubling 1♥ as a passed hand is much better--partner won't be tempted to leave it in at the one level, he will know you have some values and good shape and can push them with the right hand and sell to 2♥ undoubled with the wrong hand.

I could be wrong, but I believe that it might have been better to have competed earlier with this hand (double 1H).
If the opps have 8 hearts between them, and you have one, then (math majors please confirm) partner rates to have 4 hearts. I don't know what the percentages are that having one 4-card suit might reduce the chance of having a second 4-card suit, but...
P can be hung if you balance at the 2-level when you could have competed at the 1-level and P is 4-trip-3.
As I think about this, I am thinking that, yes, I want to have the classic shape when making an immediate competitive (takeout) double but that, on this auction, having 2 or 3 cards in the opps suit might increase the chances that our partnership has a viable 8+-card fit. Yo no sais/ je ne sais pas.
Interesting topic

DHL

I respectfully disagree. When the auction begins P-1C-P-1H, you are between two unlimited opponents who have not shown a fit and both know you don't have enough to open the bidding and also know your partner could not overcall 1C or make a takeout double. Stepping in here without excellent compensating shape is much riskier than when the opponents' have announced a fit (the 2H raise) and then showed limited values by not trying for game. Also, the 2H raise has a much higher chance of being based on a 4-card raise than a 3-card raise as most pairs would still bid 1S with 4324 or 4315 patterns. If on the given hand you caught partner with the same shape but 0-6 hcp and LHO redoubled it could get bloody even in 1S doubled.

Winston

[dogsbreath]

Hi
..doubling certainly isnt 'safe', but neither is pass. I'm much more aggressive than i used to be in these positions because it's gonna be hard to beat 2H even if p has 4.
Additionally, opps 'know' it's their hand and will probably compete to 3H unless they have clear-cut alternative action. This may not hold true against really strong pairs, but in general y must pressurise the opps as often as possible.

Rgds Dog

[Double !]

Winstonm, on Feb 10 2006, 09:24 PM, said:

I respectfully disagree.  When the auction begins P-1C-P-1H, you are between two unlimited opponents who have not shown a fit and both know you don't have enough to open the bidding and also know your partner could not overcall 1C or make a takeout double.  Stepping in here without excellent compensating shape is much riskier than when the opponents' have announced a fit (the 2H raise) and then showed limited values by not trying for game.  Also, the 2H raise has a much higher chance of being based on a 4-card raise than a 3-card raise as most pairs would still bid 1S with 4324 or 4315 patterns.  If on the given hand you caught partner with the same shape but 0-6 hcp and LHO redoubled it could get bloody even in 1S doubled.

Winston

May I respectfully question your respectful disagreement? lol - I love these discussions: I learn a lot from them.

IMO, I guess there are two ways to look at this. On the given bidding sequence, the opps have found a fit but have also bid approximately to their limit, i.e.: they have already determined about how high and in what strain they are going to bid. To balance now is sort of like giving a fielder's choice because the partner has somewhat limited itself. Yet it seems automatic at matchpoints.

Should one decide to compete earlier by of bidding directly over the 1H response, yes, both opps are as yet unlimited, but now they have neither determined how high or in what strain their partnership should be playing the hand. Yes, that could result in an occasional big number (not vul), but the opps might determine that they won;t collect a large enough penalty and continue bidding. In addition, there are hands where partner can have reasonable values and still not have a bid over 1 Club by opps.

It's late and I know that my personal preference is to get in quickly when I have the right shape. I shall wait and listen to more feedback, and learn.

DHL

ps: still wish I had a pair of Luis' sunglasses. Makes these decisions so much easier!!!

[mr1303]

I double every day of the week, at whatever format of the game, at whatever vulnerability in this situation.

I wouldn't even think twice about it.

[Free]

I Dbl

[ochinko]

I balance with 2♠. It may seem like a gamle, but has some benefits:

1. If that turns out to be the final contract, the lead would be from their stronger hand. Partner is unlikely to bid 2♠ with QJx if I double.

2. You don't scare them off to compete in 3♥, unaware of the bad heart break. They know they have a heart fit, and could well rise.

Most of the time partner will have four hearts, pass, and even the best defense is not certain to set them. Even if we do, we score 100, but if we don't, we score -670. 2♠ -1 NV doesn't scare me even if doubled. By bidding 2♠ I avoid a disaster while giving opps a chance to make a mistake.

[Fluffy]

What you need is a bit more specific agreemnets on what a balancing double should have on similar auctions. IMO your partner expected too much from you on this deal and the double is ok. But others might agree otherwise, just train your partnership

[Winstonm]

Double !, on Feb 11 2006, 12:00 AM, said:

Winstonm, on Feb 10 2006, 09:24 PM, said:

I respectfully disagree.  When the auction begins P-1C-P-1H, you are between two unlimited opponents who have not shown a fit and both know you don't have enough to open the bidding and also know your partner could not overcall 1C or make a takeout double.  Stepping in here without excellent compensating shape is much riskier than when the opponents' have announced a fit (the 2H raise) and then showed limited values by not trying for game.  Also, the 2H raise has a much higher chance of being based on a 4-card raise than a 3-card raise as most pairs would still bid 1S with 4324 or 4315 patterns.  If on the given hand you caught partner with the same shape but 0-6 hcp and LHO redoubled it could get bloody even in 1S doubled.

Winston

May I respectfully question your respectful disagreement? lol - I love these discussions: I learn a lot from them.

IMO, I guess there are two ways to look at this. On the given bidding sequence, the opps have found a fit but have also bid approximately to their limit, i.e.: they have already determined about how high and in what strain they are going to bid. To balance now is sort of like giving a fielder's choice because the partner has somewhat limited itself. Yet it seems automatic at matchpoints.

Should one decide to compete earlier by of bidding directly over the 1H response, yes, both opps are as yet unlimited, but now they have neither determined how high or in what strain their partnership should be playing the hand. Yes, that could result in an occasional big number (not vul), but the opps might determine that they won;t collect a large enough penalty and continue bidding. In addition, there are hands where partner can have reasonable values and still not have a bid over 1 Club by opps.

It's late and I know that my personal preference is to get in quickly when I have the right shape. I shall wait and listen to more feedback, and learn.

DHL

ps: still wish I had a pair of Luis' sunglasses. Makes these decisions so much easier!!!

I'm with you in that I prefer to get in quickly but there are times when it is not safe to do so and it also sends the wrong message. In the given auction, as third seat I would expect a 2-suit double by a passed hand to be 5152 or 5251 and would strongly compete with a 4-card holding in either suit. I'm not a big fan of balancing but sometimes you have to get in there and fight for the partscore, especially after the auctions of 1C-2C, 1D-2D and 1H-2H.

When the auction begins: p-1c-p-1H-p-2H-p-p, you can be assured that your side holds between 18 and 22 HCP; however, when it begins p-1C-p-1H, whatever is in your hand may be your side's total assets.

Winston

[Double !]

Winstonm, on Feb 11 2006, 10:07 AM, said:

I'm with you in that I prefer to get in quickly but there are times when it is not safe to do so and it also sends the wrong message. In the given auction, as third seat I would expect a 2-suit double by a passed hand to be 5152 or 5251 and would strongly compete with a 4-card holding in either suit. I'm not a big fan of balancing but sometimes you have to get in there and fight for the partscore, especially after the auctions of 1C-2C, 1D-2D and 1H-2H.

When the auction begins: p-1c-p-1H-p-2H-p-p, you can be assured that your side holds between 18 and 22 HCP; however, when it begins p-1C-p-1H, whatever is in your hand may be your side's total assets.

Winston

Interesting

Don't I have other bids available at this point to show 5-5 hands at this point, including 1NT?
IMO, a dbl would tend to show closer to the traditional shape of a double, and a NT bid or some other 2-suited bid (a cue or something)?

I would also prefer to compete early because I have the master suit - spades.

It really seems to me that this is a matter of personal preference, partnership agreements, and what other bids you have available.

have a nice one
DHL

[Winstonm]

Quote

Don't I have other bids available at this point to show 5-5 hands at this point, including 1NT?
IMO, a dbl would tend to show closer to the traditional shape of a double, and a NT bid or some other 2-suited bid (a cue or something)?

IMO, the significant issue is that you are a passed hand - while you can assign meanings to 1N and cue bid, is it really of value to do so when the only hand you would really like to compete with would be 5/5 or maybe if aggressive 5/4. If that is the case, you can do this with double and still have the safety net of the 1-level in spades: no other bid gives you this safer haven.

As a non-passed hand it makes sense to separate distribution with double and cue and even 1N if you like.

Anyway, that's how I view this situation for what it is worth.

Winston

[mcphee]

I would have gotten in a round before but do not think you did something horrible. Perhaps your partner ended up being annoyed due to the misdefence. I think passing the balancing dble with this hand was misjudged. These is far too much to lose and the one trick set is not my idea of an imps dble of a partscore. I would pass this double at pairs, but would need a few more drinks to pass at imps.

[Chamaco]

mcphee, on Feb 11 2006, 03:50 PM, said:

Perhaps your partner ended up being annoyed due to the misdefence.

No absolutely.
This player- despite strong - is a very pleasant person and usually he never shows signs of irritation even when I commit some bad mistakes.
The same happened here.

The one and only reason why I posted the question was that the fact that if a real expert (not BBO expert) had been ready to pass this double, perhaps other stronmg players would do that, and, in this case, I had probably to listen and learn, perhaps reconsidering my previous view about such balancing situations.

[han]

I agree with both Don and Winston here.

Certainly as a passed hand I have other bids available that show 5-5 shape, I would not require more than 4-4 for the double. If the hand was a bit stronger (same shape but more stuff in the unbid suits) then I would expect a near unanimous vote for the direct double of 1♥.

On the other hand, entering is riskier and (not sure this has been mentioned) may give declarer essential information later. I'm actually not so worried about going for a big number in 1S NV against V.

[Winstonm]

Hannie, on Feb 11 2006, 02:15 PM, said:

I agree with both Don and Winston here.

Certainly as a passed hand I have other bids available that show 5-5 shape, I would not require more than 4-4 for the double. If the hand was a bit stronger (same shape but more stuff in the unbid suits) then I would expect a near unanimous vote for the direct double of 1♥.

On the other hand, entering is riskier and (not sure this has been mentioned) may give declarer essential information later. I'm actually not so worried about going for a big number in 1S NV against V.

Han brings up a good point that no one else has mentioned and it sways my bidding; when you are constantly getting involved with weakish hands with little hopes of outbidding the opponents, you are giving declarer lots of information on how to play the hand - unlesss you believe you can find a fit and either outbid your opponents or find a useful sacrifice IMO this weak "noise" that so many espouse does little good and can do quite a bit of harm and should be avoided unless it has some distinct purpose. I can't see the argument as calling it "prebalance" as neither opponent has limited his hand - this is much different than the auction 1h-p-2h-X as prebalance as RHO is now limited and this indeed can be used as prebalance. I'm also with Han in that I would not be overly concerned about going for a number in 1S doubled, which is why I would want to have this bid available when 5/5 and not have to risk the 2-level, ergo using double as a minimum of 4/5 but in practice I'm more likely to be 5/5.

IMO an important and overlooked point is having a valid reason to bid. If I hold something like KQxxx, x, QJ10xx, xx I can certainly expect that with sufficient fit to be able to do a number of positive things: bid and make a game, bid and make a partscore, or bid to a useful sacfrifice. The distinction here IMO is that a true balance has at its heart the concept of either making your own 2-level contract or forcing the opponents one level higher where you may then secure a plus score.

I also happen to agree with Han that more concentrated values with less shape could sway me to compete - but even then I am doing so with purpose and my partner should not be disappointed in my hand if he jumps to the 3-level in one of my suits on Axxx - my concentration and accompanying shortness in at least one of the opps suits should provide a degree of protection, although in truth I would be more likely to simply overcall 1S is the suit were good enough.

Winston

[civill]

Chamaco, on Feb 10 2006, 11:21 AM, said:

Team match
We are NV vs VULN.

You are dealt, 1st seat:

KJxx-T-Txxx-Axxx


YOU....LHO.....PARD......RHO

Pass...1C......Pass........1H
Pass...2H......Pass.........Pass
?

Do you balance or not ?

It's too late to decide whether bid,Just getting not too many dirty water!

[Chamaco]

civill, on Feb 12 2006, 01:50 AM, said:

Chamaco, on Feb 10 2006, 11:21 AM, said:

Team match
We are NV vs VULN.

You are dealt, 1st seat:

KJxx-T-Txxx-Axxx


YOU....LHO.....PARD......RHO

Pass...1C......Pass........1H
Pass...2H......Pass.........Pass
?

Do you balance or not ?

It's too late to decide whether bid,Just getting not too many dirty water!

I am sorry I did not understand what you mean...

[Double !]

Hannie, on Feb 11 2006, 02:15 PM, said:

On the other hand, entering is riskier and (not sure this has been mentioned) may give declarer essential information later. I'm actually not so worried about going for a big number in 1S NV against V.

Han
I agree with you that there is a definite risk of giving declarer additional info should the opps buy the hand. Just as opening a mini NT can give some otherwise undisclosed info. But, that is a risk that I, personally, would choose to take at imps in order to try to explore at a low level whether or not we are competing in the master suit or not. Maybe this is a poor strategy for me in the long run, but i have been OK with this so far. And I very much avoid overcalls on 4-card suits. I would not suggest doubling with this weak a hand if I didn't own the master suit (spades).

Actually, these types of hands are one reason why I personally like to play lighter than normal direct 1NT overcalls NV (13-16). It takes off some of the pressure on the partnership when one has an opener but no good bid after the opps opener. The risk of double and going for a number again is measured against the gain of being able to get into the competitive auction as well as depriving the opps of some exchange of info. Good to have some escape system in place. (OK, more of a matchpoint bid but, then, i cut my teeth on matchpoints.)

I am not trying to win any debate. I am just sharing some (possibly distorted) opinions and style, and absorbing the feedback.

DHL

[civill]

Chamaco, on Feb 11 2006, 10:23 PM, said:

I am sorry I did not understand what you mean...

Pass...1C......Pass........1H
Pass(?)

Could u understand now?

[benlessard]

Yes textbook X not balancing when stiff in opp suit cost too much in the long run.


i would prefer to X on the first round.


Ben