[pilowsky]

It's a little known fact that in this auction double means partner lead a ____

---

This hand comes from an Acol auction featured on YouTube.

[bluenikki]

pilowsky, on 2022-May-16, 04:49, said:

It's a little known fact that in this auction double means partner lead a ____

---

This hand comes from an Acol auction featured on YouTube.

In America 50 years ago, there was an unwritten understanding that this requested a *spade* lead.

Earlier still, there was a wonderful convention called the Fisher double. After an auction beginning with 1NT and ending with 3NT, it requests a diamond lead if Stayman had been bid and a club lead if Stayman had not been bid. The theory, I guess, was that without a double, partner will tend to lead a major, it's 50% they'll hit your suit if it's a major.

Carl

[LBengtsson]

♠ for me. Though with West's actual hand I would logically think it meant choose a lead other than a ♠. So given that information I would choose a ♥ as there was no Stayman enquiry HOWEVER this only works on the actual hand because of West's ♠ holding. If west did not have this holding in the ♠ suit I would still lead a ♠.

[DavidKok]

Standard this would ask for a spade lead. Also you've shown declarer's hand, so we don't have anything other than the double to go on for the lead.

[Cyberyeti]

bluenikki, on 2022-May-16, 05:23, said:

In America 50 years ago, there was an unwritten understanding that this requested a *spade* lead.

Earlier still, there was a wonderful convention called the Fisher double. After an auction beginning with 1NT and ending with 3NT, it requests a diamond lead if Stayman had been bid and a club lead if Stayman had not been bid. The theory, I guess, was that without a double, partner will tend to lead a major, it's 50% they'll hit your suit if it's a major.

Carl

Well the logic is that if stayman has been bid you could have doubled 2♣ for a club lead so no sense in it asking for one if you haven't.

Traditionally 1N-3N-X asks for a spade, at one point we played it for a heart on the basis that with equivalent major suit holdings we'd default to a spade. I've also seen it just ask for a short suit lead without specifying.

[helene_t]

I thought it was common to ask for your worst/shortest major, as that is the one which doubler is more likely to have?

[Tramticket]

We have the following agreements:

a. If the player on lead has bid a suit, double = lead your suit.
b. If the doubler has bid a suit, double = lead my suit.
c. If both have bid a suit, double = lead your suit.
d. If neither defender has bid, double = lead dummy’s first suit.
e. If no suit has been bid naturally, double = lead a spade.

[paulg]

helene_t, on 2022-May-16, 06:40, said:

I thought it was common to ask for your worst/shortest major, as that is the one which doubler is more likely to have?

So did I.

[pescetom]

Tramticket, on 2022-May-16, 07:48, said:

We have the following agreements:

a. If the player on lead has bid a suit, double = lead your suit.
b. If the doubler has bid a suit, double = lead my suit.
c. If both have bid a suit, double = lead your suit.
d. If neither defender has bid, double = lead dummy’s first suit.
e. If no suit has been bid naturally, double = lead a spade.

We had that too, but it was too much for most partners and BW was pretty scathing when it was discussed.
So I reverted to spades for now, although I see reason in both hearts and worst major.
It is impressive how often spades actually works: a winner in terms of memory load and risk, at least.

[pilowsky]

DavidKok, on 2022-May-16, 06:10, said:

Standard this would ask for a spade lead. Also you've shown declarer's hand, so we don't have anything other than the double to go on for the lead.

Yes, I showed declarer's hand because it seemed that the double represents a problem for declarer.
The full hand is shown in the video (see link in OP).
The person presenting the hand was firm in his belief that a ♥ lead was called for.

[DavidKok]

Tramticket, on 2022-May-16, 07:48, said:

b. If the doubler has bid a suit, double = lead my suit.

Funny, we use double as 'lead something else'. Partner is assumed to be more likely to lead the suit we bid anyway, and doubling 3NT to tell the opps 'no, I really have the suit I'm claiming to have' gives them another chance to run.

As an aside, I think 'find my major' is not a great agreement for the same reason: absent a double, partner is likely to do that anyway! The gains from lead-directing doubles are highest when both the lead is necessary to defeat the contract and partner would not have found that lead otherwise, so on a frequency basis it is best to use it to ask for an unusual lead. It depends on the auction what lead would be most unusual, but I much prefer to exclude a suit I've bid, and also prefer to not make partner guess as to my major. Also: by agreeing that double asks for spades (hearts works equally well, just not 'either one you find it') partner can break ties in favour of hearts if we pass.

pilowsky, on 2022-May-17, 00:28, said:

Yes, I showed declarer's hand because it seemed that the double represents a problem for declarer.
The full hand is shown in the video (see link in OP).
The person presenting the hand was firm in his belief that a ♥ lead was called for.

This is the first time I've heard of this agreement, but I think it is no better or worse than agreeing that it asks for a spade lead. I don't think declarer has an issue - if the meaning of the double is properly disclosed it seems clear to run.