[bilalz]

Once again I turn to the superior wisdom and experience of you folks to fill a gap in our system. I saw a hand on bbo this morning (Cavendish Pairs, cross IMPs) where it went 1c (3s) Dbl 4h all pass. On some tables it went 1c (2s) Dbl 3h 4h. Most declarers ended up in 4H. Opener had 3424 shape with AQxx of hearts and Qxx of Spades (the other cards I do not remember but nothing unusual anywhere). The doubler had Jx KTxxxx A xxxx.

The hand got me thinking and searching for common agreements about what doubles and bids mean after partner has opened and there is a preempt right after that. There seems to be plenty of literature and blog posts on defense against normal preempts but a quick google search came up empty on this particular (and rather common) scenario. Are all doubles forcing takeouts? and how do you show extra strength from either hand? Your thoughts (the hand above is just an example to start off the discussion, please broaden to specify what you would do with a range of hands against a range of preempts)?

[pescetom]

bilalz, on 2019-February-07, 09:28, said:

The doubler had KTxxxx Jx A xxxx.

Do you mean ♠Jx ♥KTxxxx ♦A ♣xxxx ?

[bilalz]

pescetom, on 2019-February-07, 14:34, said:

Do you mean ♠Jx ♥KTxxxx ♦A ♣xxxx ?

Yes sorry. I will change it in the OP.

[helene_t]

Marty Bergen discusses this in Points, Schmoints.

The negative double at the 3-level does not promise anything in particular other than points. Opener should not bid 4♥ with a balanced hand. Balanced hands respond by bidding 3NT or by passing.

You can miss a 4-4 fit in hearts this way, but the alternative is to endure some 4-3 fits or to force responder to pass whenever he doesn't have four hearts.

Another common agreement is that any action by responder over a 3-level preempt forces to game. This may not be such a good idea if you play weak notrump and responder will have to act more aggressively. But it does simplify things (less misunderstandings about forcing character of various bids).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

if we open and they make a preemptive overcall at the 2-level, negative X and
some form of Lebensohl from both sides helps in most situations to get the stolen
space back.
if we open and they make a preemptive overcall at the 3-level, you only have neg. X,
since 3NT IS needed as to play, preempts / interference makes live harder.
In case we opened a major, lets say spades, and they make a preempt in a minor, you
can use some kind of xfer schema to get back some ways to differentiate the strength
of raising openers major which is the most important thing to do.
Besides that, you forget about invites, you either go / force to game or stay low.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Looking at your example hand: The hand is strong enough for a neg. X forcing to
the 3 level, but I am not sure, the hand is strong enough to force to the 4 level.

[rmnka447]

You really have 3 options available over 2 ♠ when holding a long ♥ suit:

Bid 3 ♥,
Negative Double then bid ♥, and,
Pass then bid ♥ if partner reopens the auction.

The direct bid of 3 ♥ should pretty much shows a game forcing hand.
Negative Double shows less values when you show a long suit, typically 8-11.
Passing shows even less.

The given hand looks to fall in the Negative Double then bid category. If partner finds a 2 NT bid, then you can bid 3 ♥ and partner will picture your hand as almost exactly what you have.

Understand that the Negative Double is still unlimited without a long suit, but with the 2 unbid suits something like ♠ Jx ♥ KJxx ♦ AKxx ♣ Qxx. But then over 3 ♣ or 3 ♦ by partner you could try for 3 NT by bidding 3 ♠ for a stopper.

[mikeh]

Are all doubles of preemptive overcalls forcing and takeout?

Well, they aren't forcing in the sense that opener is not permitted to pass. They are primarily takeout oriented, in that opener needs a reason to pass rather than to bid. The higher the preempt, the more common it is for opener to pass.

For example 1D (4S) x: x is card-showing, and opener passes with pretty much all balanced hands and bids only with 'extra' shape.

1D (2S) x: pretty much promises 4+ hearts. Promises is not the same as guarantees, but responder expects opener to bid on the assumption that responder has 4+ hearts, and the values to commit to the 3-level opposite an opening hand.

1D (3S) x: now this gets interesting. There are two main schools of thought. The traditional one is that this 'promises' 4+_hearts and enough values to feel that competing is the better option compared to passing. This is usually based on having something that looks close to opening values, since one is likely to be at the 4-level (or higher). Plus, the odds of partner passing are increased, since sometime we catch partner with no good call and he has to gamble a pass (or he has a great, unexpected trump holding, and he is delighted to pass).

The other school of thought is to play the double as a 'Thrump' double. Basically, a thrump double asks opener to bid 3N with a spade stopper, even if he has 4 hearts. Doubler says nothing at all about hearts: he is saying that he expects 3n to be a reasonable contract if opener has a typical opening hand with a stopper.

Note the differences in what opener will be doing. Over a traditional double opener will be passing with many balanced minimums and a spade card, because he has no assurance that 3N is a reasonable spot opposite a negative double, and will hope for 5+ tricks on defence. He will bid 4H most times he has 4 hearts.

Opposite a thrump double, opener will bid 3N with a balanced minimum and a spade stopper. He will also rarely bid 4H.

Note that the thrump double can be based on hands on which one would never make a negative double.

1D (3S): xx Kx Jxx AKQ10xx Playing traditional negative doubles, double is risky since one is stuck over 4H. But bidding 4C commits us to 5 of a minor. That hardly looks right....meanwhile, if partner has a balanced minimum with a spade stopper, we want to be in 3N. Hence the thrump double.

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2019-February-08, 11:36, said:

1D (3S) x:
....
The other school of thought is to play the double as a 'Thrump' double. Basically, a thrump double asks opener to bid 3N with a spade stopper, even if he has 4 hearts. Doubler says nothing at all about hearts

I like the idea.
What about 1D (3H) x:
- does doubler still say nothing at all about the other major?
- what would 1D (3H) 3S show?