[lamford]

---

Teams.

This was a tip given to me by the late Victor Silverstone, who sadly passed away recently. Your lead.

[nullve]

♣Q

[Winstonm]

The double should be red suits so I need to find partner with AK and KQ and lead the KQ suit and hope there is a club to lose before clubs are established. I need the reds to divide 3-2 and 2-2 but if I lead the 3-2 suit I might establish a discard on the third round of a 2-2 suit loser. Therefore I need to lead the 2-2 suit so I lead a low diamond.

[smerriman]

Winstonm, on 2021-November-29, 23:13, said:

The double should be red suits

Will depend on agreements but I would assume it shows clubs. So I'm also leading the queen, hopefully followed by the killing switch.

[AL78]

smerriman, on 2021-November-29, 23:45, said:

Will depend on agreements but I would assume it shows clubs. So I'm also leading the queen, hopefully followed by the killing switch.

I've never heard of that agreement and would also assume it showed the red suits.

[pilowsky]

Doesn't double of an artificial bid commonly mean lead that suit?
As in double of a Bergen raise or double of a transfer bid etc.
What am I missing?

[DavidKok]

It does, but the question is how 'artificial' 2♣ is. In many systems 2♦ and 2♥ would have been natural, showing 5(+). This leaves 2♣ for:

• GF balanced.
  
• GF with long clubs.
  
• GF with a spade fit, possible shortage (worst case 5=4=4=0 outside a suitable splinter range). If you play Jacoby NT this option is not necessary.

The first two option promises some club length (at least three, if balanced without a 5-card suit and without a spade fit, and always at least two even with spade fit), the second promises 5+ and the third is a rare beast. It is plausible that this is the actual agreement of the pair, and they disclosed it as 'artificial' to get ahead of all the "but you don't have club length" discussions (even though in that case they should have said something like "GF, might be short in clubs if balanced or with a fit").
If that is the agreement, 2♣ most likely contains some actual clubs, and double for the reds is sensible no matter what the opps call their bid.
If their 2♦ and up are all sorts of artificial (maybe limited, 10-11 HCP?) and responder may well have a long red suit, double for clubs is very sensible.

As a comparison, I keep a text file with pre-typed alerts that I frequently need. My 2♣ alert reads:

2♣ = a. GF ♣; b. 11-13 bal.; c. 10-11 5+♥ (over 1♠); d. GF with fit (possibly short ♣); e. GF bal.

Most of these promise at least some club length, and the rare types are usually ruled out on the subsequent auction immediately.

[Cyberyeti]

pilowsky, on 2021-November-30, 03:56, said:

Doesn't double of an artificial bid commonly mean lead that suit?
As in double of a Bergen raise or double of a transfer bid etc.
What am I missing?

Indeed, and is alertable if it doesn't here IIRC

[Winstonm]

smerriman, on 2021-November-29, 23:45, said:

Will depend on agreements but I would assume it shows clubs. So I'm also leading the queen, hopefully followed by the killing switch.

I didn’t notice 2C was artificial.

[lamford]

Winstonm, on 2021-November-30, 07:34, said:

I didn’t notice 2C was artificial.

Indeed the double showed clubs and Victor's tip was always to lead the top card of partner's suit, even if an honour.

Leid th' hi'est caird or it wull be tatties o'er the side is the tip of the day.

Full hand at
http://woodberrybc.blogspot.com/

[Winstonm]

lamford, on 2021-November-30, 08:23, said:

Indeed the double showed clubs and Victor's tip was always to lead the top card of partner's suit, even if an honour.

Leid th' hi'est caird or it wull be tatties o'er the side is the tip of the day.

Full hand at
http://woodberrybc.blogspot.com/

In my defense, I did take care to notice that 2C was not by a passed hand and therefore was not Drury. Then my mind went blank.

[AL78]

pilowsky, on 2021-November-30, 03:56, said:

Doesn't double of an artificial bid commonly mean lead that suit?
As in double of a Bergen raise or double of a transfer bid etc.
What am I missing?

You are missing nothing, I failed to notice the 2♣ was artificial, in which case I can see the double is asking for a club lead.

[Trinidad]

I am sorry, but in my world, the double is takeout of spades, the only suit that the opponents have shown.
And for the record, GF does not equal to "strong". Responder is usually in complete control of the auction and can, at any point, sign off in 4♠ (and in some cases, even pass opener's 3♠).

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

I think your comment that a diamond lead (and playing 2 more) is immediately fatal is a bit of an overbid, it is however eventually fatal on the strip squeeze.

[lamford]

Trinidad, on 2021-December-01, 07:13, said:

I am sorry, but in my world, the double is takeout of spades, the only suit that the opponents have shown.

That is a way to play it, but the lack of an alert tells you that it shows clubs.

[mycroft]

Interesting. Because for me, it doesn't:

Quote

Do NOT Alert the following []:...
After an Opening Bid and a Response if either the Opening Bid or the Response is Artificial, any double.

Nor, it seems, for Trinidad("thanks" to Google Mangle Translate):

Quote

You must alert bids where you suspect the opposing team will make another without warning
assigns meaning to. This is the main rule.
...
Bid appointments and habits that are not alerted:
...
Doubles, except when the aforementioned main rule applies.

Nor, even, for some games at the world or European level:

Quote

If screens are not in use, do NOT alert the following:

All doubles.

It seems that in Scotland, even if screens are in use, Trinidad's double would not be Alertable - because All Doubles are not Alerted.

Perhaps, it's only in one odd place, where the Alert regulations are so unique and complicated that no other organization agrees with them, that the lack of Alert here "shows clubs". Which, if this was a lesson held in the YC's teaching room, would make sense. But assuming that it would be obvious to everyone on a worldwide bridge site seems parochial.

[Note: despite my comments above, I believe, and have stated here a number of times, that the EBU's Alert regulations on doubles are as close to "simple, obvious, and understandable by all who have read them" as it is possible to get (while also saying that that "as close to" is still pulling a fair weight), and I would be very happy if I were playing and ruling under those "Alerting doubles" rules instead of any of the others I have quoted.]

[Trinidad]

lamford, on 2021-December-01, 12:22, said:

That is a way to play it, but the lack of an alert tells you that it shows clubs.

I don't understand what you are saying: What shows clubs?
2♣ was alerted as art. GF. So, that didn't show (or deny) clubs.

The double was not alerted. That certainly doesn't mean that it shows clubs. Are you serious that in your jurisdiction the standard meaning of a takeout double (showing the three suits that the opponents didn't show (or extra values)) requires an alert?

Do these takeout doubles require an alert too when they show hearts, diamonds and clubs?
1♠-Pass-1NT-X
1♠-Pass-3♣ (7-10, 4+ spades)-X
1♠-X-2NT (4+ spades, limit or better)-X
1♦ (11-16, 0+ diamonds) - Pass- 1♠-X

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

Trinidad, on 2021-December-03, 03:45, said:

I don't understand what you are saying: What shows clubs?
2♣ was alerted as art. GF. So, that didn't show (or deny) clubs.

The double was not alerted. That certainly doesn't mean that it shows clubs. Are you serious that in your jurisdiction the standard meaning of a takeout double (showing the three suits that the opponents didn't show (or extra values)) requires an alert?

Do these takeout doubles require an alert too when they show hearts, diamonds and clubs?
1♠-Pass-1NT-X
1♠-Pass-3♣ (7-10, 4+ spades)-X
1♠-X-2NT (4+ spades, limit or better)-X
1♦ (11-16, 0+ diamonds) - Pass- 1♠-X

Rik

The double of an artificial suit bid shows the suit bid unless alerted, yes the double of a bergen 3♣ shows clubs unless alerted, that doesn't mean most people don't X to show T/O of spades, just that they alert it.

Your bottom example is a double of a natural bid so different, X of NT also has different rules.

[mycroft]

Yes, in my response to lamford, I didn't link to the EBU Alert procedure that explains your confusion. Sorry:

• "Simple" Alert table for non-Laws nerds
  
• Full System and Alert regulations. Chapter 4 has the Alerting rules in grotty detail.

So yes, "obviously" to all English and Welsh players, a non-Alerted double of an artificial 2♣ response is clubs. And frankly, I think that's great!

As an example of "'as close to' is pulling a lot of weight", however, witness the following bits out of the regulations (emphasis mine, and only for reference):

Quote

4B2: Doubles
The rules for alerting doubles are:
(a) Suit bids that show the suit bid: Alert, unless the double is for take-out.
...
(d) Suit bids that do not show the suit bid: Alert, unless the double shows the suit bid.
In 4B2(a) and (d) the word ‘show’ is defined as follows:
‘it is natural, or shows willingness, in the context of the auction, to play in the suit, or it has been followed by two passes’.
...
4C1:The following are considered ‘natural’ for the purposes of alerting and regulation of partnership understandings (see also 3E1 [short minor openings]):
(a) A bid of a suit before the opening bidder’s second turn to call which shows that suit and does not show any other suit. A natural bid before the opening bidder’s second turn to call shows 4+ cards, except for a minimum opening or response in clubs or diamonds which only need show 3+ cards. Bids later in the auction also only need show 3+ cards.
Preference bids, completion of transfer bids and raises may be on shorter suits.

So, I play 1♠-p-3♣ as a Limit Fit bid - "Primary club suit worth mentioning, spade support, limitish values." My reading of the above is that - at least arguably - that bid doesn't "show" clubs (it's not natural as it shows spades as well as clubs, surely I'm never going to play in clubs - okay, 6 or 7 maybe - and has not yet and will not be passed by partner), so again arguably, the only not-Alerted double is one that shows responder's long suit. Which is - counterintuitive?

But, apart from constructed scenarios like this one, the complete double Alerting regulation can in 99.9% of cases be boiled down to "if you double NT for penalty, double suit for takeout if natural and lead-directing if artificial, don't Alert, anything else Alert" (except for the "don't Alert almost all doubles over 3NT" bit). And in 99+% of those even the novices can understand, both what to do and what the opponents are doing - if we're willing to teach them. That's something you can't say about any other Alert Procedure.

[pescetom]

mycroft, on 2021-December-03, 10:44, said:

So yes, "obviously" to all English and Welsh players, a non-Alerted double of an artificial 2♣ response is clubs. And frankly, I think that's great!

You half convinced me: maybe this is better than WBF inspired "If screens are not in use, do NOT alert the following: All doubles (except the following abstruse exceptions)". Of course defenders of that would argue that this EBU rule is vulnerable to flag waving alerts ("penalty here, not takeout"), applying the same reasoning that disallows alerts of any call above 3NT beyond first round. Written agreements could help reduce this risk, but even the most scrupolous pairs will often lack clear explanation of how agreements about double are to be interpreted in specific situations.

The WBF rules look almost sensible when applied to the mess below:
a tricky redouble