Balancing over Weak 1NT
Terry Faust
standard defense in the direct seat that includes double is penalty.
After 1NT Pass Pass,
1. Do you still play your standard defense?
2. Is double still penalty or should it now be for takeout?
Thanks
kingfish
***
No matter your hand strength, your high cards are not well positioned
with the bidder behind you, so this is a consideration. I believe
that double is better used in a conventional sense. In addition,
there is greater need to be able to "balance" with a natural suit
call. My suggestion is that you use Double for 2-suited hand types,
and use natural suit bids. In my partnerships we use the balancing
Double for the Majors, and other calls to be natural.
Sandy Barnes
***
Michael Angelo Ravera
Basically, Sandy is right that you won't often know thay it is right
to penalize in the protection seat.
While I play either Mohan or Capp against Weak 1NT in the direct seat
(with an optional double), I find it useful to play Bergen (DONT) in
the protection seat against both weak and strong 1NT openers.
X=Long suit (partner can sometimes convert for penalties)
2C=Clubs plus one of the 3 top suits
2D=Diamonds and one of the majors
2H=Majors
2S=Natural Usually 5(332) shape.
Thomas Dehn
"Terry Faust" <mg...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Assume that when opponents open a weak NT (12-14) you play your
> standard defense in the direct seat that includes double is penalty.
>
> After 1NT Pass Pass,
>
> 1. Do you still play your standard defense?
Yes if 4th seat is an unpassed hand.
No if 4th seat is a passed hand.
> 2. Is double still penalty or should it now be for takeout?
I'm playing it as penalty if 4th hand seat is an unpassed hand.
Thomas
Andrew
I like the Mohan defense in both direct and balancing seat. The basics
are:
double = a big balanced hand
2C = majors
2D =>Hearts
2H =>Spades
The transfer allows the overcaller a chance to show a second suit or
extra values.
Andrew
Henry Lockwood
1. Yes: we play Suction, so each bid shows the suit above or the other
two (with some wrinkles).
2. It's penalty by an unpassed hand; we open anything unbalanced 5+
and balanced 12+, so a passed hand cannot be good enough to double for
penalties. We haven't discussed what it means, but I am having
difficulty seeing any profit in getting involved at all (it's most
likely that we have nothing making; they might not be able to make
1NT).
Alan Malloy
Curiously, one of my regular partners (who does not read RGB) suggested
just today that we start playing a different defense to 1NT when in
balancing seat. I forget already what it's called, but the idea was that
X shows any two touching suits (I assume you use 2C relay with optional
Paradox stuff); 2C shows a three-suiter including clubs (clubs and 2
higher), 2D shows a three-suiter short in clubs (diamonds and 2 higher),
and 2M is natural. I haven't really thought very hard about this
defense; does anyone see a particular merit or danger of playing it?
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
Adam Beneschan
Is there such a thing as a takeout double when there are four unbid
suits?
My tendency would be to play it for penalty, but I'd need a stronger
hand than in direct seat.
-- Adam
Alan Malloy
Sure, just not a "generic takeout". e.g., you could play Woolsey, where
double shows a 4-card major and longer minor. This isn't the standard
takeout double ("please bid anything"), but definitely asks partner to
take out the double unless he has a reason to think 1NX is going down.
Stephen Fischer
I've even seen that agreement in the direct seat - from two different
pairs. Sure enough, both times they had an opening hand with 3+ card
support for all the unbid suits. Both times their partner jumped in a
four card suit with a balanced 10-11 count.
Needless to say, we now treat a "takeout" of our 1NT opening the same
way as a penalty double. They might sort themselves out next time.
Alan Malloy
Yes, this is the default agreement for confused pairs. We play their
"takeout" doubles as if they were penalty, except that on a marginal
hand we're more likely to pass than start a runout, figuring they'll
usually save us anyway.
Kieran Dyke
"Terry Faust" <mg...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:m25r24pa6b8p4kgoe...@4ax.com...
What might a takeout double of 1NT show? Shortage in high cards?
Tiggrr
brsri...@gmail.com
> "Terry Faust" <m...@comcast.net> wrote in message
LOL
At least 3 card support for every unbid suit, basically 4333 and
loaded with honors, a rare and large four-footed mammal also known as
'The Beast':-))
Boris
Wayne
> "Terry Faust" <m...@comcast.net> wrote in message
Who cares what is shows ... it is an invention designed to get you to
otherwise unreachable 4=1 fits. Therein lies its merit.
Wayne
Ray
If my opponents won't make 4-suited takeout doubles of my NT openings,
I hope they compete with 3-suited hands. This will leave them playing
in many 4-3 fits, trying to ruff two longer suits with 3 cards and
being tapped immediately in the "longer" 4 card hand opposite
shortness. If you want to compete over NT with 3 suited hands, make
sure you have a lot of high cards in the suits. (although then you
might want to defend). The obvious defense, as against mini-Roman, is
to lead trump.
--Ray
Frances
1. Yes.
2. Yes, still penalties. And I don't buy this "we need a stronger
hand to double in fourth seat argument" because now you know that
partner has some values. The only difference is that we don't double
on a lightish hand with a good lead, because stupid partner will lead
the wrong thing.
When fourth seat is a passed hand, I play a different defence (in one
partnership) but I still play double as "penalties" (i.e. maximum
pass, semi-balanced). I used to play double as artificial in one
partnership, but we've found that double as a maximum pass is
astonishingly successful, even though it is arguably not entirely
sound. In particular most people play P 1NT P P x P P xx as SOS which
rather limits your downside.
You do need to be pretty confident about your partnership defensive
agreements to play this, you get some big penalties but also get to
defend some very delicate contracts.
At the Crockfords two weekends ago it went P 1NT P P x all pass, in
second seat I had a 6-count, dummy hit with a 10-count, and it went a
very very slow one off. Another triumph for the method(!)
Adam Beneschan
That seems to stretch the meaning of "takeout" somewhat, at least the
way I think it's usually interpreted. A use like that wouldn't be
very useful, anyway; if I were sitting down with a new partner and he
said "Let's play a double of 1NT is for takeout", I wouldn't know what
he meant (assuming he was good enough that I know he didn't mean
"three-card support for all four suits), since there are several types
of doubles available that ask partner to "bid something". And if an
opponent made a double like that and explained it to me as "takeout",
that clearly would not be enough information. So I think that while
you're probably right, at least 99% of people who use the term (with
no other adjectives) aren't using it to refer to the sort of
artificial takeout you're referring to.
-- Adam
Adam Beneschan
> 1. Yes.
> 2. Yes, still penalties. And I don't buy this "we need a stronger
> hand to double in fourth seat argument" because now you know that
> partner has some values.
The reason I thought you would need to be stronger is that your values
are going to be in front of the 1NT opener, so you'd need a little
more to be able to defeat it. Maybe my thinking is backwards here,
though. On the other hand, if I had enough to double a 12-14 notrump
for penalties in direct seat, it's unlikely that opener's partner
would have had enough to make a game try anyway, so it seems to me
that the knowledge that partner would have some values (that a
balancer would have) doesn't add all that much to the knowledge a
direct doubler would have---at least that's what seems intuitive to
me. But of course I could be wrong. 12-14 is not the norm over here,
so I don't have as much experience defending against it as against
strong notrump.
-- Adam
Andrew
> On May 16, 7:09 pm, Alan Malloy <alan.NO.S...@malloys.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Adam Beneschan wrote:
> > > On May 16, 7:08 am, Terry Faust <m...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >> Assume that when opponents open a weak NT (12-14) you play your
> > >> standard defense in the direct seat that includes double is penalty.
>
> > >> After 1NT Pass Pass,
>
> > >> 1. Do you still play your standard defense?
>
> > >> 2. Is double still penalty or should it now be for takeout?
>
> > > Is there such a thing as a takeout double when there are four unbid
> > > suits?
>
> > > My tendency would be to play it for penalty, but I'd need a stronger
> > > hand than in direct seat.
>
> > > -- Adam
>
> > Sure, just not a "generic takeout". e.g., you could play Woolsey, where
> > double shows a 4-card major and longer minor. This isn't the standard
> > takeout double ("please bid anything"), but definitely asks partner to
> > take out the double unless he has a reason to think 1NX is going down.
>
> That seems to stretch the meaning of "takeout" somewhat, at least the
> way I think it's usually interpreted.
IMO, the "usual" interpretation (three-suited with shortness in one
suit bid by the opponents) is a profound misunderstanding of the term
"takeout". It confuses one non-essential aspect of the double (the
shape-specific aspect) with the meaning of the term.
Definition: A double for takeout is any double that is not primarily
an attempt to penalize.
Negative doubles, responsive doubles, support doubles, action doubles,
Snapdragon, Rosenkranz are all doubles for takeout. Likewise, a
conventional double of 1NT is a double for takeout (regardless of what
shape it shows). The difference between all these doubles is shape-
specificness. In some situations, we place constraints on the shapes
the takeout double shows. The shape constraints vary from situation to
situation, based on the logic of the preceding auction and
conventional agreements.
Here is a thought experiment to make my point. Consider this auction:
1C-X. What makes this double takeout? Is it the fact that we expect
doubler to be 3-suited? Absolutely not. We could define this double as
showing 5-4 or better in the reds and still accurately call it a
"takeout" double. It is just no longer a 3-suited takeout, now its a 2-
suited takeout.
I am sure many people think this distinction is pedantic. However, I
believe that the absence of a general concept of "takeout double" has
led people to ignore obvious commonalities in many takeout double
situations. For example some players still have trouble with the idea
that: 1C-(1S)-X-(2S)-X is a responsive double because they fail to
understand the conceptual similarity between that auction and the one
they have been taught to label responsive: (1C)-X-(2C)-X. But in both
cases, a player is doubling a bid-and-raised suit when partner's
initial action was itself a takeout double.
> A use like that wouldn't be
> very useful, anyway; if I were sitting down with a new partner and he
> said "Let's play a double of 1NT is for takeout", I wouldn't know what
> he meant
"Takeout" is not a sufficient explanation. You also need information
about the shape(s) shown by this specific variant of takeout double.
> (assuming he was good enough that I know he didn't mean
> "three-card support for all four suits), since there are several types
> of doubles available that ask partner to "bid something". And if an
> opponent made a double like that and explained it to me as "takeout",
> that clearly would not be enough information.
See above.
> So I think that while
> you're probably right, at least 99% of people who use the term (with
> no other adjectives) aren't using it to refer to the sort of
> artificial takeout you're referring to.
This does not make the informal usage of the term correct.
Andrew
CBFalconer
> Adam Beneschan wrote:
>> Terry Faust <m...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Assume that when opponents open a weak NT (12-14) you play your
>>> standard defense in the direct seat that includes double is
>>> penalty. After 1NT Pass Pass,
>>>
>>> 1. Do you still play your standard defense?
>>> 2. Is double still penalty or should it now be for takeout?
>>
>> Is there such a thing as a takeout double when there are four
>> unbid suits?
>>
>> My tendency would be to play it for penalty, but I'd need a
>> stronger hand than in direct seat.
>
> Woolsey, where double shows a 4-card major and longer minor.
> This isn't the standard takeout double ("please bid anything"),
> but definitely asks partner to take out the double unless he
> has a reason to think 1NX is going down.
A double on that auction is for takeout, and shows 4 card support
for all suits. You can only do this on a 4-4-4-4 distribution
hand. Holding almost 1/3 of the cards in the deck, you should have
compensating high card points, i.e. about 16. I think that covers
the matter adequately. :-)
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **