About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC etc.
As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
Many Thanks,
John
PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but didn't spot them on there.
Used with virtually all hands with THREE card support. Not with four cards. Not with two. Raising directly would show four. Generally played by opener after responder bids a major at the one level. Cues of an enemy suit can be a number of hand types, with primary fit or without, but never with three card support.
Good hands can follow up the support double with another bid.
I play them up to and including two of responder's suit (regardless of the meaning of the overcall - after 1C:1S(2S), X shows three card support whether 2S is natural or Michaels.
Worth discussing whether they apply over 1NT by fourth hand, or after responder bids 1C:1D. I don't recommend playing them after 2/1s. Doubles of overcalls higher than two of responder's suit can be whatever you like, but I don't recommend support doubles so high with ordinary hands.
Support redoubles are possible too, after fourth hand doubles.
Tiggrr
"john" <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
I'm curious as to why support doubles wouldn't be more valuable over 4cM systems? We play them in many unusual situations [including 1H (1S) X and with one partner 1H (X) XX] up through 2H. After all, we're looking for 8card fits. This allows opener to freely raise when he has a 5card suit.
How else can an 5card opener know that his partner has 3cards, when partner is playing him for 4cards?
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
I'm curious as to why support doubles wouldn't be more valuable over 4cM systems? We play them in many unusual situations [including 1H (1S) X and with one partner 1H (X) XX] up through 2H. After all, we're looking for 8card fits. This allows opener to freely raise when he has a 5card suit.
How else can an 5card opener know that his partner has 3cards, when partner is playing him for 4cards?
Cheers, Kurt
%%%%%%%%%
I am also curious why support doubles would be less important for Acol players
the normal supportdouble goes like this 1D - pass - 1S - 2C DBL
and I cannot see how in this situation support doubles would be more important for SAYC
> On Nov 6, 4:23 am, john <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > etc.
> > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > Many Thanks,
> > John
> > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > didn't spot them on there.
> I'm curious as to why support doubles wouldn't be more valuable over > 4cM systems? We play them in many unusual situations [including 1H > (1S) X and with one partner 1H (X) XX] up through 2H. After all, we're > looking for 8card fits. This allows opener to freely raise when he has > a 5card suit.
> How else can an 5card opener know that his partner has 3cards, when > partner is playing him for 4cards?
The auction in question was 1C (P) 1H (1S) X (4S) AP
AR's comment on the double was: "Support double showing precisely 3 hearts ... it is a key tool in the strong NT/5CM system, although less necessary in weak NT/4CM Acol"
as the body of the article was about the how the hand was played by Tor Helness, there was no further explanation of why. I could always ask him I suppose ...
> > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > etc.
> > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > Many Thanks,
> > John
> > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > didn't spot them on there.
> I'm curious as to why support doubles wouldn't be more valuable over > 4cM systems? We play them in many unusual situations [including 1H > (1S) X and with one partner 1H (X) XX] up through 2H. After all, we're > looking for 8card fits. This allows opener to freely raise when he has > a 5card suit.
> How else can an 5card opener know that his partner has 3cards, when > partner is playing him for 4cards?
> Cheers, > Kurt
> %%%%%%%%%
> I am also curious why support doubles would be less important for Acol > players
> the normal supportdouble goes like this > 1D - pass - 1S - 2C > DBL
> and I cannot see how in this situation > support doubles would be more important for SAYC
> Co Wiersma
Is it because opener less likely to have four card support because he could have opened 1S if he did? I have never played 4CM so I am just speculating here.
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
The more I read this post the more astounded I am at the Robson quote. The auction 1m (P) 1M (X) and 1m (P) 1M (2om) are the same whether you are playing SAYC/ACOL or 2/1 - and in all systems support doubles/ redoubles make sense - as you look for a 8card fit. Arguably, in SAYC and 2/1 systems, this auction will take place more often, since all of the 3card minor suit openings will be opened with 1M in ACOL [except (42)=(43) shapes].
On top of it, anytime you are playing a 4card major system [ACOL], responder would be well placed to show 3card support as well - through a support double structure.
Am I off base here? After all, Robson is a pretty big name, especially in competitive bidding circles.
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
One followup that many pairs playing support doubles have not discussed is when the responder follows up with the unbid minor.
1D P 1S 2H dbl P 3C
My partnerships have decided to play this nonforcing
> On Nov 6, 4:23 am, john <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > etc.
> > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > Many Thanks,
> > John
> > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > didn't spot them on there.
> I'm curious as to why support doubles wouldn't be more valuable over > 4cM systems? We play them in many unusual situations [including 1H > (1S) X and with one partner 1H (X) XX] up through 2H. After all, we're > looking for 8card fits. This allows opener to freely raise when he has > a 5card suit.
> How else can an 5card opener know that his partner has 3cards, when > partner is playing him for 4cards?
We always raised on three unless there was a better bid that was obvious, when I played Acol. And support doubles aren't usually made by responder to show three-card support for opener anyway. I think Robson's comment may have been prompted more by the Weak NT aspect of Acol than the four-card Major aspect.
Playing support doubles deprives you of the occasional opportunity to express your opinion when you have opened 1D on AX - KQTX - AKXX - QXX, partner has responded 1S and RHO decides it is time to bid 2H.
> On Nov 6, 4:23 am, john <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > etc.
> > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > Many Thanks,
> > John
> > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > didn't spot them on there.
> The more I read this post the more astounded I am at the Robson quote. > The auction 1m (P) 1M (X) and 1m (P) 1M (2om) are the same whether you > are playing SAYC/ACOL or 2/1 - and in all systems support doubles/ > redoubles make sense - as you look for a 8card fit. Arguably, in SAYC > and 2/1 systems, this auction will take place more often, since all of > the 3card minor suit openings will be opened with 1M in ACOL [except > (42)=(43) shapes].
> On top of it, anytime you are playing a 4card major system [ACOL], > responder would be well placed to show 3card support as well - through > a support double structure.
> Am I off base here? After all, Robson is a pretty big name, especially > in competitive bidding circles.
> Kurt- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
As someone who used to play 4M a very long time ago, I can state that if one opens 1M with balanced 12-15 point hands, then a whole class of hands with 3 card support for responder goes away.
That doesn't mean that opener can't have, e.g.,
Axx KJx x KJxxxx
and want to use a support double after, say, 1c (p) 1h (2d) ?, but it does remove some of the pressure.
When combined with weak 1nts (a style I rather dislike but it is highly swingy at MPs), that double is in my opinion needed to alert responder that opener has a strong 1nt equivalent without 4 card support for responder's suit. Otherwise, hands like
AQx Ax Kxx KJxxx
become unbiddable (unless you want to rebid 2nt with 15-17 and 3nt with 18-19, which is self preempting).
<bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote: > We always raised on three unless there was a better bid that was > obvious, when I played Acol. And support doubles aren't usually made > by responder to show three-card support for opener anyway. I think > Robson's comment may have been prompted more by the Weak NT aspect of > Acol than the four-card Major aspect.
Right, don't Acol players need the double here to show a strong notrump hand?
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
I am surprised at the wording. My understanding is that it is the NT range that mainly affects the value of support doubles. If playing a weak NT (which most Acol players do) then after an auction like:
1C P 1H 2D
opener is either unbalanced (at least 5-4 in 2 best suits) or 15+ points. Hence double is needed for the very likely balanced 15-17 point hands. Playing a strong NT you are never 15-17 balanced so do not need a double for that hand and can release it for 3 card raises.
Also the weak NT means that if you have 3 card support and a minimum hand you also must have a singleton or void so raising is less of a concern as a 4-3 fit may well play very well. In the auction I gave opener, if less than 15 points with 3 hearts, will be 4315 shape nearly all the time so 2H is the correct bid.
> On Nov 6, 7:31 am, KWSchneider <questionofbala...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 4:23 am, john <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > > etc.
> > > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > > Many Thanks,
> > > John
> > > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > > didn't spot them on there.
> > The more I read this post the more astounded I am at the Robson quote. > > The auction 1m (P) 1M (X) and 1m (P) 1M (2om) are the same whether you > > are playing SAYC/ACOL or 2/1 - and in all systems support doubles/ > > redoubles make sense - as you look for a 8card fit. Arguably, in SAYC > > and 2/1 systems, this auction will take place more often, since all of > > the 3card minor suit openings will be opened with 1M in ACOL [except > > (42)=(43) shapes].
> > On top of it, anytime you are playing a 4card major system [ACOL], > > responder would be well placed to show 3card support as well - through > > a support double structure.
> > Am I off base here? After all, Robson is a pretty big name, especially > > in competitive bidding circles.
> > Kurt- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> As someone who used to play 4M a very long time ago, I can state that > if one opens 1M with balanced 12-15 point hands, then a whole class of > hands with 3 card support for responder goes away.
> That doesn't mean that opener can't have, e.g.,
> Axx > KJx > x > KJxxxx
> and want to use a support double after, say, 1c (p) 1h (2d) ?, but it > does remove some of the pressure.
> When combined with weak 1nts (a style I rather dislike but it is > highly swingy at MPs), that double is in my opinion needed to alert > responder that opener has a strong 1nt equivalent without 4 card > support for responder's suit. Otherwise, hands like
> AQx > Ax > Kxx > KJxxx
> become unbiddable (unless you want to rebid 2nt with 15-17 and 3nt > with 18-19, which is self preempting).
> Henrysun909- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Playing weak NT and light responses to one of a minor, you may be better off making the double penalty oriented, and passing with the 15-17 balanced, and the so-so 5-4 hands. Responder makes the next call on the assumption opener has the 15-17 notrump hand, and opener may need to correct. An aution like:
> On Nov 6, 5:53 pm, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com> > wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 7:31 am, KWSchneider <questionofbala...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 6, 4:23 am, john <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > > > etc.
> > > > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > > > Many Thanks,
> > > > John
> > > > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > > > didn't spot them on there.
> > > The more I read this post the more astounded I am at the Robson quote. > > > The auction 1m (P) 1M (X) and 1m (P) 1M (2om) are the same whether you > > > are playing SAYC/ACOL or 2/1 - and in all systems support doubles/ > > > redoubles make sense - as you look for a 8card fit. Arguably, in SAYC > > > and 2/1 systems, this auction will take place more often, since all of > > > the 3card minor suit openings will be opened with 1M in ACOL [except > > > (42)=(43) shapes].
> > > On top of it, anytime you are playing a 4card major system [ACOL], > > > responder would be well placed to show 3card support as well - through > > > a support double structure.
> > > Am I off base here? After all, Robson is a pretty big name, especially > > > in competitive bidding circles.
> > > Kurt- Hide quoted text -
> > > - Show quoted text -
> > As someone who used to play 4M a very long time ago, I can state that > > if one opens 1M with balanced 12-15 point hands, then a whole class of > > hands with 3 card support for responder goes away.
> > That doesn't mean that opener can't have, e.g.,
> > Axx > > KJx > > x > > KJxxxx
> > and want to use a support double after, say, 1c (p) 1h (2d) ?, but it > > does remove some of the pressure.
> > When combined with weak 1nts (a style I rather dislike but it is > > highly swingy at MPs), that double is in my opinion needed to alert > > responder that opener has a strong 1nt equivalent without 4 card > > support for responder's suit. Otherwise, hands like
> > AQx > > Ax > > Kxx > > KJxxx
> > become unbiddable (unless you want to rebid 2nt with 15-17 and 3nt > > with 18-19, which is self preempting).
> > Henrysun909- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> Playing weak NT and light responses to one of a minor, you may be > better off making the double penalty oriented, and passing with the > 15-17 balanced, and the so-so 5-4 hands. Responder makes the next > call on the assumption opener has the 15-17 notrump hand, and opener > may need to correct. An aution like:
> 1C (pass) 1H 2D > pass (psss) 2NT
That makes some sense to me. Since I haven't played 4-card majors outside of a strong club context in decades, I no longer have the at the table experience to be sure, however.
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
John:
What they are:
suppose you are the dealer after a "sandwich overcall," such as
1D (P) 1S (2H). You hold three card spade support. Many raise with three. The support double (developed by Eric Rodwell) allows you to double the overcall artificially whenver you hold exactly three-card support for responder. You will raise with four, and all other bids deny as much as three. Partner now knows your exact length and will pull with a seven card fit (a Moysian, 4-3), and stand or raise with eight. That is the basic idea.
There are issues, even among those who use the support double. Let me present some:
First, does it apply after responder bids 1D:
1C (P) 1D (1S)? Or does the double show hearts?
Does it apply when the oppos have bid and raised their suit:
1C (1S) 2H (2S)?
How about after a takeout doube:
1C (Dbl) 1S (2H)?
There is little agreement on these issues, though Danny Kleinman, (like me, not a supporter of the convention), addressed them in his "Twenty Questions on Support Doubles" article in BW some time ago. .
Also,what about auctions in which responder shows five cards (rather than four) when he bids, for example as many players use this auction:
1C (1H) 1S (2H), does a support double still guarantee three, or can you support on a doublteon (because there will still be a minimum of seven trumps)?
How about when responder has an implied suit:
1C (1H) Dbl. (2H)? if a negative double promises four spades, is the support double on or off?
How about in those partnerships that use negative doubles differently, say,. denying spades? Is opener now showing four? Or is he supporting diamonds?
Even in partnerships that have defined all of these sequences, there are still problems, especially over sandwich overcalls. Let me list some of them:
1. Rodwell created support doubles for his "strong club" partnership with Meckstroth. They apply only after a 1D opening (which may be short) and a major suit response. The 1D opening is limited (to about 16 HCP). How does the opener show significantly greater strength, as he might have in "standard" bidding? Does he jump later (after the support double), or does he jump first (thereby implicitly denying three-card support)? Rodwell is on record as stating that standard partnerships should not make the use of the double "mandatory," i. e., not doubling does not deny three-card support for this reason.
2. You will sometimes, - rarely, but these will be important swing hands at IMPs - want to defend the oppos' overcall. Opener has a stong hand (typically in the Meckwell 1C opening range), no support for partner, and the overcall has hit his second suit. How does opener make sure the opponents play the hand doubled? Not using support doubles, he doubles for penalties - simple. But playing the support double, he must pass, thereby denying support but NOT showing extra strength - and hope that responder (who may have a minimum 5-6 HCP) comes to the rescue with a double. opposite a possibly-minimum, not fitting, opener, when does that ever happen?
3. Whenever opener does make a support double, he gives his LHO the opportunity for lead direction - remember that responder will be declarer. So, after
1C (P) 1H (1S) Dbl. (2D) - lead a diamond . 1C (P) 1H (1S) Dbl. (Rdbl) - lead a spade - I have a top honor
1C (P) 1H (1S) Dbl. (2S) - length but no top honor, not interested in defending a heart contract.
etc.
The last two auctions are examples of Extended Guildenstern, a conventional topic I have touched on here previously. Many years ago, I wrote an article for the old Bidge Today mag, "Eating the Opponents' Sandwich," about some of the dangers in using support doubles. If you can obtain this material, I urge that you seek it out.
On Nov 7, 7:30 am, alvin <apbluth...@aol.com> wrote:
2. You will sometimes, - rarely, but these will be important swing hands at IMPs - want to defend the oppos' overcall. Opener has a stong hand (typically in the Meckwell 1C opening range), no support for partner, and the overcall has hit his second suit. How does opener make sure the opponents play the hand doubled? Not using support doubles, he doubles for penalties - simple. But playing the support double, he must pass, thereby denying support but NOT showing extra strength - and hope that responder (who may have a minimum 5-6 HCP) comes to the rescue with a double. opposite a possibly-minimum, not fitting, opener, when does that ever happen?
*************************
Without disputing the accuracy of Alvin's statement, the rules of bridge do allow us to defend the opponent's hand undoubled. Therefore, after (say) 1c (p) 1s (2h) ?, and opener who holds
x KJ9x AKx AQxxx
a good hand, not good enough to force to game, and which can virtually guarentee that 2h is going down at least 1 trick can collect 50 instead of 100, or 100 instead of 300, or 150 instead of 500 if NV, or 100 instead of 200, 200 instead of 500, or 300 instead of 800. Obviously, the more they go down, the bigger is the loss.
Support double practitioners argue that the small gains that accrue by giving responder a clear picture of trump length outweigh the occasional large loss that comes from not having a penalty double (and having a responder who is unable to balanced with, say,
AJxxx x xxxx xxx).
I'm not at all sure that's really true, and it may be worthwhile to separate raises from support double raises on the basis of shape (e.g. the double is either unbalanced or shows extra values; balanced minimum 3-card raises pass the overcall). Still, at MPs, the argument turns on frequency of gain versus size of gain, and advocates of the support double would argue that they get frequent small gains that outnumber the rarer large loss.
> On Nov 7, 7:30 am, alvin <apbluth...@aol.com> wrote:
> 2. You will sometimes, - rarely, but these will be important swing > hands at IMPs - want to defend the oppos' overcall. Opener has a stong > hand (typically in the Meckwell 1C opening range), no support for > partner, and the overcall has hit his second suit. How does opener > make sure the opponents play the hand doubled? Not using support > doubles, he doubles for penalties - simple. But playing the support > double, he must pass, thereby denying support but NOT showing extra > strength - and hope that responder (who may have a minimum 5-6 HCP) > comes to the rescue with a double. opposite a possibly-minimum, not > fitting, opener, when does that ever happen?
> *************************
> Without disputing the accuracy of Alvin's statement, the rules of > bridge do allow us to defend the opponent's hand undoubled. > Therefore, after (say) 1c (p) 1s (2h) ?, and opener who holds
> x > KJ9x > AKx > AQxxx
> a good hand, not good enough to force to game, and which can virtually > guarentee that 2h is going down at least 1 trick can collect 50 > instead of 100, or 100 instead of 300, or 150 instead of 500 if NV, or > 100 instead of 200, 200 instead of 500, or 300 instead of 800. > Obviously, the more they go down, the bigger is the loss.
> Support double practitioners argue that the small gains that accrue by > giving responder a clear picture of trump length outweigh the > occasional large loss that comes from not having a penalty double (and > having a responder who is unable to balanced with, say,
> AJxxx > x > xxxx > xxx).
> I'm not at all sure that's really true, and it may be worthwhile to > separate raises from support double raises on the basis of shape (e.g. > the double is either unbalanced or shows extra values; balanced > minimum 3-card raises pass the overcall). Still, at MPs, the argument > turns on frequency of gain versus size of gain, and advocates of the > support double would argue that they get frequent small gains that > outnumber the rarer large loss.
The argument I would make is against the idea that penalty doubles are either infrequent or more important at IMP. At Matchpoints, you can make much tighter penalty doubles and thus they come up more often. Beat four out of five of them and you are well on your way to very good scores. Responder can, of course, pull the double.
This hand: KX - AKXXX - QTX - AXX, partner having responded 1S, worked out very well against 2DX. I might have whacked it at IMP also, since 2DX making isn't game but, +200 isn't such a big deal at IMP. Note that I'm not all that happy to defend if partner reopens because he is short in Diamonds.
<bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote: > On Nov 7, 12:03 pm, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com> > wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 7:30 am, alvin <apbluth...@aol.com> wrote:
> > 2. You will sometimes, - rarely, but these will be important swing > > hands at IMPs - want to defend the oppos' overcall. Opener has a stong > > hand (typically in the Meckwell 1C opening range), no support for > > partner, and the overcall has hit his second suit. How does opener > > make sure the opponents play the hand doubled? Not using support > > doubles, he doubles for penalties - simple. But playing the support > > double, he must pass, thereby denying support but NOT showing extra > > strength - and hope that responder (who may have a minimum 5-6 HCP) > > comes to the rescue with a double. opposite a possibly-minimum, not > > fitting, opener, when does that ever happen?
> > *************************
> > Without disputing the accuracy of Alvin's statement, the rules of > > bridge do allow us to defend the opponent's hand undoubled. > > Therefore, after (say) 1c (p) 1s (2h) ?, and opener who holds
> > x > > KJ9x > > AKx > > AQxxx
> > a good hand, not good enough to force to game, and which can virtually > > guarentee that 2h is going down at least 1 trick can collect 50 > > instead of 100, or 100 instead of 300, or 150 instead of 500 if NV, or > > 100 instead of 200, 200 instead of 500, or 300 instead of 800. > > Obviously, the more they go down, the bigger is the loss.
> > Support double practitioners argue that the small gains that accrue by > > giving responder a clear picture of trump length outweigh the > > occasional large loss that comes from not having a penalty double (and > > having a responder who is unable to balanced with, say,
> > AJxxx > > x > > xxxx > > xxx).
> > I'm not at all sure that's really true, and it may be worthwhile to > > separate raises from support double raises on the basis of shape (e.g. > > the double is either unbalanced or shows extra values; balanced > > minimum 3-card raises pass the overcall). Still, at MPs, the argument > > turns on frequency of gain versus size of gain, and advocates of the > > support double would argue that they get frequent small gains that > > outnumber the rarer large loss.
> The argument I would make is against the idea that penalty doubles are > either infrequent or more important at IMP. At Matchpoints, you can > make much tighter penalty doubles and thus they come up more often. > Beat four out of five of them and you are well on your way to very > good scores. Responder can, of course, pull the double.
> This hand: KX - AKXXX - QTX - AXX, partner having responded 1S, > worked out very well against 2DX. I might have whacked it at IMP also, > since 2DX making isn't game but, +200 isn't such a big deal at IMP. > Note that I'm not all that happy to defend if partner reopens because > he is short in Diamonds.
In effect then you are playing card-showing doubles, although perhaps the expectation of defense in doubler's hand is slightly higher than for some other users of cardshowing odubles.
> On Nov 7, 7:30 am, alvin <apbluth...@aol.com> wrote:
> 2. You will sometimes, - rarely, but these will be important swing > hands at IMPs - want to defend the oppos' overcall. Opener has a stong > hand (typically in the Meckwell 1C opening range), no support for > partner, and the overcall has hit his second suit. How does opener > make sure the opponents play the hand doubled? Not using support > doubles, he doubles for penalties - simple. But playing the support > double, he must pass, thereby denying support but NOT showing extra > strength - and hope that responder (who may have a minimum 5-6 HCP) > comes to the rescue with a double. opposite a possibly-minimum, not > fitting, opener, when does that ever happen?
> *************************
> Without disputing the accuracy of Alvin's statement, the rules of > bridge do allow us to defend the opponent's hand undoubled. > Therefore, after (say) 1c (p) 1s (2h) ?, and opener who holds
> x > KJ9x > AKx > AQxxx
> a good hand, not good enough to force to game, and which can virtually > guarentee that 2h is going down at least 1 trick can collect 50 > instead of 100, or 100 instead of 300, or 150 instead of 500 if NV, or > 100 instead of 200, 200 instead of 500, or 300 instead of 800. > Obviously, the more they go down, the bigger is the loss.
> Support double practitioners argue that the small gains that accrue by > giving responder a clear picture of trump length outweigh the > occasional large loss that comes from not having a penalty double (and > having a responder who is unable to balanced with, say,
> AJxxx > x > xxxx > xxx).
> I'm not at all sure that's really true, and it may be worthwhile to > separate raises from support double raises on the basis of shape (e.g. > the double is either unbalanced or shows extra values; balanced > minimum 3-card raises pass the overcall). Still, at MPs, the argument > turns on frequency of gain versus size of gain, and advocates of the > support double would argue that they get frequent small gains that > outnumber the rarer large loss.
> Henrysun909
Henry:
Put your two hands oipposite one another, and the 2H bidder goes down three (three hearts, one spade, two diamonds, two clubs with the finesse working) without a likely game. Possibly down four, if you can ruff the third round of clubs out successfully.
Like you, I would rather get +500 or +800 than +150 or + 300. This could turn an IMPS match around for me.
> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote: > > On Nov 7, 12:03 pm, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com> > > wrote:
> > > On Nov 7, 7:30 am, alvin <apbluth...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > 2. You will sometimes, - rarely, but these will be important swing > > > hands at IMPs - want to defend the oppos' overcall. Opener has a stong > > > hand (typically in the Meckwell 1C opening range), no support for > > > partner, and the overcall has hit his second suit. How does opener > > > make sure the opponents play the hand doubled? Not using support > > > doubles, he doubles for penalties - simple. But playing the support > > > double, he must pass, thereby denying support but NOT showing extra > > > strength - and hope that responder (who may have a minimum 5-6 HCP) > > > comes to the rescue with a double. opposite a possibly-minimum, not > > > fitting, opener, when does that ever happen?
> > > *************************
> > > Without disputing the accuracy of Alvin's statement, the rules of > > > bridge do allow us to defend the opponent's hand undoubled. > > > Therefore, after (say) 1c (p) 1s (2h) ?, and opener who holds
> > > x > > > KJ9x > > > AKx > > > AQxxx
> > > a good hand, not good enough to force to game, and which can virtually > > > guarentee that 2h is going down at least 1 trick can collect 50 > > > instead of 100, or 100 instead of 300, or 150 instead of 500 if NV, or > > > 100 instead of 200, 200 instead of 500, or 300 instead of 800. > > > Obviously, the more they go down, the bigger is the loss.
> > > Support double practitioners argue that the small gains that accrue by > > > giving responder a clear picture of trump length outweigh the > > > occasional large loss that comes from not having a penalty double (and > > > having a responder who is unable to balanced with, say,
> > > AJxxx > > > x > > > xxxx > > > xxx).
> > > I'm not at all sure that's really true, and it may be worthwhile to > > > separate raises from support double raises on the basis of shape (e.g. > > > the double is either unbalanced or shows extra values; balanced > > > minimum 3-card raises pass the overcall). Still, at MPs, the argument > > > turns on frequency of gain versus size of gain, and advocates of the > > > support double would argue that they get frequent small gains that > > > outnumber the rarer large loss.
> > The argument I would make is against the idea that penalty doubles are > > either infrequent or more important at IMP. At Matchpoints, you can > > make much tighter penalty doubles and thus they come up more often. > > Beat four out of five of them and you are well on your way to very > > good scores. Responder can, of course, pull the double.
> > This hand: KX - AKXXX - QTX - AXX, partner having responded 1S, > > worked out very well against 2DX. I might have whacked it at IMP also, > > since 2DX making isn't game but, +200 isn't such a big deal at IMP. > > Note that I'm not all that happy to defend if partner reopens because > > he is short in Diamonds.
> In effect then you are playing card-showing doubles, although perhaps > the expectation of defense in doubler's hand is slightly higher than > for some other users of cardshowing odubles.
You could put it that way. We don't tend to double in these situations with support for partner or if opener has a long suit of his own. Length in the overcaller's suit is three or four. I can't remember doubling with fewer and I can't remember having more.
> About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > etc.
> As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> Many Thanks,
> John
> PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > didn't spot them on there.
Support doubles precisely to the following auctions: You open at the 1-level in a suit. Your partner makes a 1-level response showing 4+ cards in the suit (with or without LHO acting) RHO bids something below two of partner's suit You double.
This double shows 3-card support for partner, virtually any range. The only constraint is that partner is allowed to pass, so you might not want a void in their suit.
A few uncertainties in the above definition which you need to clear up with any partner: - It may or may not apply over RHO's 1NT bid (more often double is penalties) - It may or may not apply over RHO's cue bid (e.g. 1C 1D 1S 2C x) - It may or may not apply after partner's response showing diamonds (e.g. 1C P 1D 1H x) - Some people playing good/bad 2NT also include 18-19 balanced in the double
When they should be used: Any time you have three card support for partner which you want to show (you can always bid again next round with a strong hand).
When they should not be used: If you don't want to admit to 3-card support. The two typical hand types that don't double are those with a strong suit of their own (e.g. 3-7) and sub-minimum openings with a poor holding in RHO's suit (e.g. xxx KJ109 KQx QJx after 1C P 1S (2H))
You need to discuss responder's rebids. Typically two of the agreed major is weak, may be only a 4-card suit (to play in a 4-3 fit), returning to opener's suit is also weak, a new minor at the 2-level is a weak canape, a cue bid is strong, NT are natural... but you need to discuss if 3m is weak or strong, and what a jump to 3 of your major shows.
Why they are useful: (i) If you raise partner's suit at once you now promise 4-card support. That helps partner judge competitive auctions. (ii) You take some strain off the cue bid, which now excludes a hand uncertain about strain with 3-card support (that hand doubles then cue bids next round)
Frequently people seem to assume that "Acol" is synonymous with "Weak NT". This is not the case.
If you play 4-card majors they are less useful, because opener cannot have a balanced hand with a 4-card major. A raise of responder's major is always unbalanced. Support doubles can still be useful, but at least responder is not worried about playing a 4-3 fit with two balanced hands.
If you play weak NT they can still be useful, but it is often more useful to use the double in this auction to show a strong NT.
> On Nov 6, 9:23 am, john <john.somerfi...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > About 10 days ago, in his column in The London Times, Andrew Robson > > described an auction with support doubles, and added the comment that > > whilst these weren't that useful when playing 4CM systems such as > > Acol, they were almost essential when playing 5CM systems such as SAYC > > etc.
> > As I am in the process of converting from playing ACOL to playing SEF > > (French equiv of SAYC), Andrews comment would implies that I should > > probably consider including support doubles (if I'm not already > > without realising it!), so I would be grateful if someone could point > > me at a good (on-line) description of what they are, why they are so > > useful, and when they should be used (as opposed to simply just > > raising partner or cue-bidding the enemies suit etc).
> > Many Thanks,
> > John
> > PS I've already (briefly) looked at Richard Pavilcek's site, but > > didn't spot them on there.
> Support doubles precisely to the following auctions: > You open at the 1-level in a suit. > Your partner makes a 1-level response showing 4+ cards in the suit > (with or without LHO acting) > RHO bids something below two of partner's suit > You double.
> This double shows 3-card support for partner, virtually any range. The > only constraint is that partner is allowed to pass, so you might not > want a void in their suit.
> A few uncertainties in the above definition which you need to clear up > with any partner: > - It may or may not apply over RHO's 1NT bid (more often double is > penalties) > - It may or may not apply over RHO's cue bid (e.g. 1C 1D 1S 2C x) > - It may or may not apply after partner's response showing diamonds > (e.g. 1C P 1D 1H x) > - Some people playing good/bad 2NT also include 18-19 balanced in the > double
> When they should be used: Any time you have three card support for > partner which you want to show (you can always bid again next round > with a strong hand).
> When they should not be used: If you don't want to admit to 3-card > support. The two typical hand types that don't double are those with a > strong suit of their own (e.g. 3-7) and sub-minimum openings with a > poor holding in RHO's suit (e.g. xxx KJ109 KQx QJx after 1C P 1S (2H))
> You need to discuss responder's rebids. Typically two of the agreed > major is weak, may be only a 4-card suit (to play in a 4-3 fit), > returning to opener's suit is also weak, a new minor at the 2-level is > a weak canape, a cue bid is strong, NT are natural... but you need to > discuss if 3m is weak or strong, and what a jump to 3 of your major > shows.
> Why they are useful: (i) If you raise partner's suit at once you now > promise 4-card support. That helps partner judge competitive auctions. > (ii) You take some strain off the cue bid, which now excludes a hand > uncertain about strain with 3-card support (that hand doubles then cue > bids next round)
> Frequently people seem to assume that "Acol" is synonymous with "Weak > NT". This is not the case.
> If you play 4-card majors they are less useful, because opener cannot > have a balanced hand with a 4-card major. A raise of responder's major > is always unbalanced. Support doubles can still be useful, but at > least responder is not worried about playing a 4-3 fit with two > balanced hands.
> If you play weak NT they can still be useful, but it is often more > useful to use the double in this auction to show a strong NT.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
We play a MAF 4cM system with both canapé and balanced hands included in the 1M opening. Differentiating responder's length is paramount in contested auctions, both defensively and offensively. We believe that it is more important to immediately show responder's length in the opening major rather than to introduce a new suit, when responder has 3-4 trump.
For example, After 1S (X), one of the options of the XX is to show 3s - and opener is requested to rebid 2S with 5s. Any other bid including pass shows 4s. Responder then can correct to a new suit if he had a typical strong XX.
The same analogy exists over 1H (1S), where X shows either 3 hearts, or a strong hand [negative freebids].
This clarifies opener's rebids immensely - for example 1H (1S) X (P) 2C would show a 4H5c canapé since with 5h4c, opener would raise.
|
