"Herbert" Double
TexIrish
that just shows 12 or more points. (i.e. off -shaped). If you have heard
of it, can you give me responses and how does one differentiate between a
big hand and a minimum one.
Thanks.
Ndderek
>From: "TexIrish" col...@camalott.com
>Date: 2/21/02 1:26 AM !!!First Boot!!!
>Message-id: <a51ig...@enews3.newsguy.com>
A Herbert double may have another definition somewhere else but I use a takeout
system that works like this.
After a 1 level bid a double show about 13-18 Work points. Use of a 1NT
overcall shows either 5-12 HCP and at least 3 in each unbid suit or any hand
with 19+.
A relay shows a bad hand (usually less than 7 HCP) by responder (4th hand) and
says nothing about distribution. This is called a Herbert Negative. Doubler is
not likely to get too carried away after one.
Responder with 7+ and wishing to show the negative suit bids 1NT as in the
auction
1H X P 1NT - I have spades and some values.
The person who taught me this system allows the direct double also to show 0-4
HCP. He calls this system Really Unusual No Trump (RUNT). I'd love to give him
credit for inventing it but how much in bridge is really new?
Nelson Ford
news:a51ig...@enews3.newsguy.com...
I have been playing "minimum off-shape takeout doubles" (as the CC
refers to them) for a long time, but I've never heard it called "Herbert".
Here is how we play it:
A direct takeout double promises a hand that should be worth 2.5 quick
tricks on defense. It does not promise unbid suit(s) or any other specific
distribution.
If doubler's LHO passes, the meanings of responder's bids are:
1 of a suit < 9 HCP 4+ card suit
1NT < 9 HCP unable to bid a 4+card suit on the 1 level
(alert)
2 any 9+ HCP 5+ card suit
2C 9+ HCP no (other) 5+card suit to bid (alert:
could be short)
Examples:
1C Dbl P 1H
P ??
I would raise with 3+ Hearts and a big (19+) hand, pass with 3+H
and
<19 HCP, bid NT or my suit otherwise.
1H Dbl P 1N
P ??
I now know that responder has <4 Spades. I can pass 1N with good
Hearts and Spades; otherwise, I bid my suit.
1H Dbl 2H Dbl
P ??
Partner has shown 4 Spades and normally 9+ HCP (since he may be
forcing
me to the 3 level if I don't have 4 Spades).
1H Dbl 4H Dbl
P ??
Mostly penalty, depending on vulnerability and the doubler's
holdings.
Question for those who do not play minimum offshape takeout doubles:
How do you know what to do as responder after you hear: 1H-1S-4H-??
Most people play 6-16HCP overcalls, how do you know whether to double
for penalty, sacrifice, or bid game when overcaller can have such a wide
range of points?
Nelson Ford
richard e. willey
>news:a51ig...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> Has anyone heard of a "Herbert" Double? I understand it may be a double
> that just shows 12 or more points. (i.e. off -shaped). If you have heard
> of it, can you give me responses and how does one differentiate between a
> big hand and a minimum one.
I think that you are confusing the double with the response structure.
Many players have adopted a off-shape takeout doubles to show general
strength.
These players traditionally use a "Herbert Negative" to limit
responder'd hand.
Following an auction like
(1D) - X - (P), a first step response show weakness.
Other responses are constructive.
Many players feel that the Herbert Negative is a necessary complement
to this doubling style.
Stephen Pickett
I may have completely scrambled this but: I vaguely recall from when I first
learned bridge hearing of a Herbert Double as one of the conventions over a
preempt. In those days, playing Acol, they were always 3-level preempts.
Does that ring any bells with UK players?
--
Stephen Pickett, PO Box 44538, Vancouver BC Canada V5M 4R8
Telephone: (604) 874-7327, Fax: (604) 874-7326, ICQ UIN#212132
Go see BRidgeBRowser at http://www.microtopia.net/bridge/
Tim Prior
On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Stephen Pickett wrote:
> TexIrish wrote:
>
> > Has anyone heard of a "Herbert" Double? I understand it may be a double
> > that just shows 12 or more points. (i.e. off -shaped). If you have heard
> > of it, can you give me responses and how does one differentiate between a
> > big hand and a minimum one.
> > Thanks.
>
> I may have completely scrambled this but: I vaguely recall from when I first
> learned bridge hearing of a Herbert Double as one of the conventions over a
> preempt. In those days, playing Acol, they were always 3-level preempts.
>
> Does that ring any bells with UK players?
Doubling to show any hand with 11 or more points is a completely routine
action amongst club players here in the UK. They will wander into the
auction because they 'had an opening hand'. For example these two hands
have doubled me for take out in recent years:
1S X while holding
K108xx
Axx
Jx
QJx
1H X while holding
x
KQx
Qxx
KJ1087x
As for the name, no one calls these 'Herbert doubles'. These are take out
doubles.
Cheers,
Tim
Ian Payn
"Stephen Pickett" <sf...@microtopia.net> wrote in message
news:3C753C90...@microtopia.net...
> TexIrish wrote:
>
> > Has anyone heard of a "Herbert" Double? I understand it may be a double
> > that just shows 12 or more points. (i.e. off -shaped). If you have
heard
> > of it, can you give me responses and how does one differentiate between
a
> > big hand and a minimum one.
> > Thanks.
>
> I may have completely scrambled this but: I vaguely recall from when I
first
> learned bridge hearing of a Herbert Double as one of the conventions over
a
> preempt. In those days, playing Acol, they were always 3-level preempts.
>
> Does that ring any bells with UK players?
> --
1: Over a pre-empt bidding 'Next Suit Up' for take-out. Yes, same as
Fishbein. Just as barmy.
2: Bidding 'Next Suit Up' as a negative response to strong two bids - known,
astonishingly enough, as the Herbert Negative.
The latter is a fraction more sensible than the former. A Herbert Double?
Since it seems that the name Herbert is inextricably linked with the concept
of 'Next Suit Up', I would imagine that there's no such thing...
Who was this Herbert, anyway?
Paul Hightower
This behavior is common in the US as well, and based on an earlier
thread, appears to be world-wide. I've never encountered anyone doing
this with a well-defined response or rebid structure, however; I
*think* it is common to pass in this style as responder* with a bad
hand, and if doubler bids a new suit or NT he is merely denying a fit,
not promising 16+. The fact that doubler may well have my partner's
suit cured me of redoubling with a singleton or void.
*to the double, i.e., fourth hand, aka "advancer"
Stephen Pickett
> As far as I recall there were two 'Herbert's:
>
> 1: Over a pre-empt bidding 'Next Suit Up' for take-out. Yes, same as
> Fishbein. Just as barmy.
That's where I remember Herbert, not as a double at all, but in the next
sentence from Fishbein.
> 2: Bidding 'Next Suit Up' as a negative response to strong two bids - known,
> astonishingly enough, as the Herbert Negative.
Right, already mentioned by someone else in the thread. No Herbert double. Could
it be a nickname invented by the rude and scoffing multitude, as in "Don't
double on that junk, you (s)potty Herbert".
> The latter is a fraction more sensible than the former. A Herbert Double?
> Since it seems that the name Herbert is inextricably linked with the concept
> of 'Next Suit Up', I would imagine that there's no such thing...
I've heard of "Aces Up" but will have to leave it to the cognoscenti to
enlighten us on that. "Up yours, Herbert" by opponents?
> Who was this Herbert, anyway?
Some relation(s) of Harvey?
Disclaimer: no Herberts or Harveys were frightened, harmed, or killed in the
making of this email. The Herberts described are imaginary, invisible, six feet
tall, white, and furry. No resemblance to persons living or dead is intended.
Ian Payn
"Stephen Pickett" <sf...@microtopia.net> wrote
>
> Right, already mentioned by someone else in the thread.
++++You can't expect me to read everything.
>No Herbert double. Could
> it be a nickname invented by the rude and scoffing multitude, as in "Don't
> double on that junk, you (s)potty Herbert".
++++No-one seems to call anyone a Herbert anymore. Or an Oik. Shame.
Stephen Pickett
> ++++No-one seems to call anyone a Herbert anymore. Or an Oik. Shame.
Perhaps the latter term will come back into common usage with the
recently-released movie Board of the Wrings.
Chuck Arthur
wrote:
The "Official Encyclopedia of Bridge" ("Official" in the eyes of the
ACBL, which publishes the tome) has no entry for "Herbert Double", but
does have one for "Herbert Negative". It goes on for about 100 words,
and is surely an expansion of (2.) above.
Quoting from this entry "It was advocated by Walter Herbert when he
was a member of the Austrian team in the 30's ..."
Chuck Arthur,
Toronto, Canada
jan kamras
> As far as I recall there were two 'Herbert's:
>
> 1: Over a pre-empt bidding 'Next Suit Up' for take-out. Yes, same as
> Fishbein. Just as barmy.
>
> 2: Bidding 'Next Suit Up' as a negative response to strong two bids - known,
> astonishingly enough, as the Herbert Negative.
>
> The latter is a fraction more sensible than the former.
Why only a fraction, Ian?
Imo using "Herbert negatives" is the *only* sensible way to play strong
twos, especially when combined with a 2NT response showing a positive in the
"Herbert suit" and a 2NT rebid by opener showing 4 cds in the "Herbert
suit".
Paul Brewer
news:Pine.OSF.4.44.020222...@ermine.ox.ac.uk...
>
>
I'd call them stupid doubles. First is an obvious pass, second a 2C
overcall.
Paul
Nelson Ford
news:3c76a...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
You don't say why such doubles are "stupid", but then I guess it is a
lot easier to engage in name-calling than to actually offer any logical
analysis which people could then rebut.
Nelson
Nelson Ford
news:6bb14ced.02022...@posting.google.com...
<SNIP>
> This behavior is common in the US as well, and based on an earlier
> thread, appears to be world-wide. I've never encountered anyone doing
> this with a well-defined response or rebid structure, however; I
> hand, and if doubler bids a new suit or NT he is merely denying a fit,
> not promising 16+. The fact that doubler may well have my partner's
> suit cured me of redoubling with a singleton or void.
Yesterday the bidding went:
LHO CHO RHO Me
1H Dbl P 1NT
Dbl P 2D P
P 2H...
We play minimum offshape TOX, so partner doubled holding 6 Hearts.
At one table, 1H played by LHO was off 2. Other contracts were all over
the place, including 2H our way making 2-3. If RHO had made a redouble,
it would have been fun.
My artificial 1NT response simply showed <4 Spades and <9 HCP.
Partner was happy to pass it.
Nelson
Jonathan Jacobs
"Nelson Ford" <ford...@RemoveThis-hsv-life.com> wrote in message
news:u7e1msn...@corp.supernews.com...
> "Paul Brewer" <pa...@paul.brewers.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:3c76a...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> > "Tim Prior" <trin...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > news:Pine.OSF.4.44.020222...@ermine.ox.ac.uk...
> > > have doubled me for take out in recent years:
> > >
> > > 1S X while holding
> > >
> > > K108xx
> > > Axx
> > > Jx
> > > QJx
> > >
> > >
> > > 1H X while holding
> > >
> > > x
> > > KQx
> > > Qxx
> > > KJ1087x
> > >
> > overcall.
>
> You don't say why such doubles are "stupid", but then I guess it is a
> lot easier to engage in name-calling than to actually offer any logical
> analysis which people could then rebut.
>
> Nelson
Maybe this was just a lack of capitalisation: it should have read 'these are
Stupid doubles'. Since we have 'Herbert doubles' I have no reason to
disbelieve
the existence of Mr Stupid. Can't seem to find him in any reference books
though...
Whimsically,
Rich Johnson
Barry Rigal
> The "Official Encyclopedia of Bridge" ("Official" in the eyes of the
> ACBL, which publishes the tome) has no entry for "Herbert Double", but
> does have one for "Herbert Negative". It goes on for about 100 words,
> and is surely an expansion of (2.) above.
>
> Quoting from this entry "It was advocated by Walter Herbert when he
> was a member of the Austrian team in the 30's ..."
I have not yet seen the new Encyclopedia but I believe we were toying with
the idea of expanding the article on Herbert negatives to include a couple
of non-standard positions.
One is
1Z Dbl Pass 1W
Pass 2Z Pass
where a next step negative makes sense.
Also as I recall the Swedes (still) and the Italians (once) used to play
Herbert negatives to one-level take-out doubles on the first round.
Of course the 2D response to 2C and next step negatives to Acol Twos are a
form of Herbert Negative.
Barry Rigal
paul friedman
The step response to a take-out double was one of the original uses of the
Herbert Negative -- as described in all of Stern's books on the Vienna Club.
Vienna used it in this situation and after its forcing 1C and 1NT openings.
Pure Vienna used asking bids directly over its strong 2 suit openings.
I would think it is wrong in theory, but Vienna's Herbert negative was
always a suit, never NT. The negative after (1S)-X-(P) was 2C not 1NT.
Not all the Blue Team played Herbert to a take-out double. The Romans never
did (they used exclusion responses which make lots of sense if you double on
random shapes as they did).
Paul (bad player and bidding history buff)
"Barry Rigal" <barry...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:a58fog$47u$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...
Paul Brewer
Sorry if I gave offence.
I'm not "name-calling". I'm not accusing anyone in this NG of being stupid;
rather that in my opinion these are stupid doubles, or, if you like, that
any system
in which double is right on these hands is a stupid system.
On the first example hand, RHO has opened 1S, and I have a marginally
above average strength hand with spades as the best suit.
I cannot see any sensible alternative than to pass and await developments.
On the second, I have a reasonable club suit, and it is an advantage to
compete,
so I will overcall 2C. I suppose that with three card suport for both red
suits,
double for takeout is perhaps not entirely out of the question, but on the
whole
the hand is so lop-sided that 2C seems preferable.
Paul
"Nelson Ford" <ford...@RemoveThis-hsv-life.com> wrote in message
news:u7e1msn...@corp.supernews.com...
Ian Payn
"Barry Rigal" <barry...@mindspring.com> wrote
>
> Also as I recall the Swedes (still) and the Italians (once) used to play
> Herbert negatives to one-level take-out doubles on the first round.
>
used to play that. Nice lady. Shame about the convention.
Ian Payn
"jan kamras" <jka...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3C76992C...@san.rr.com...
> Ian Payn wrote:
>
> > As far as I recall there were two 'Herbert's:
> >
> > 1: Over a pre-empt bidding 'Next Suit Up' for take-out. Yes, same as
> > Fishbein. Just as barmy.
> >
> > 2: Bidding 'Next Suit Up' as a negative response to strong two bids -
known,
> > astonishingly enough, as the Herbert Negative.
> >
> > The latter is a fraction more sensible than the former.
>
> Why only a fraction, Ian?
Sorry. Just being facetious. Might have worked better had I written 'just a
teensy fraction'.
Daniel Auby
> ACBL, which publishes the tome) has no entry for "Herbert Double", but
> does have one for "Herbert Negative". It goes on for about 100 words,
> and is surely an expansion of (2.) above.
>
> Quoting from this entry "It was advocated by Walter Herbert when he
> was a member of the Austrian team in the 30's ..."
IIRC he was a member of the Austrian "Wunderteam" that dominated
European bridge in the (late) thirties and in contrast to some of his
team members he escaped the nazis after Anschluss and survived. I
believe he got a work as conductor at an opera house in Texas
(Houston?). During that time you could obviously be a master of the
game although you were prominent in another profession. This is not as
easy today. Much more competition.
BTW In Sweden there is presently something of a revival of the Herbert
Negative. Not wide-spread yet but we are a growing group. We use it in
response to T/O doubles in certain positions (not to strong
2-openings, hardly any play such). Some in few positions, other in
many.
David
<f70952a.02022...@posting.google.com>...
[snip]
> Negative. Not wide-spread yet but we are a growing group. We use it in
> response to T/O doubles in certain positions (not to strong
> 2-openings, hardly any play such). Some in few positions, other in
> many.
Could you share with us which auctions you and others use Herbert negatives
and the reasons why? Thanks in advance.
David
--
David Morgan
dmo...@webone.com.au
Daniel Auby
Sorry. I am a little bit late with my answer. But instead I will try
to give a comprehensive description of "how" and "why", thus putting
into use the old Swedish proverb: he who waits for something good does
not wait in vain... (is there an English equivalent?).
BASIC IDEA WITH THE HERBERT
To enable advancer to a T/O D to tell if he has a really lousy hand or
not.
E.g.
1S – D – P – 1NT
If this shows, say, "0-5 all hands", then Doubler will of course know
this and will not jump around just because he has some 18-19p, but,
perhaps more important, if advancer instead bids 2 of a suit Doubler
knows advancer has some 6-9 points. Some would say this is more
important than having to group in darkness after the 0-5 response.
To use the 1-step bid for a number of hands instead of only a few is
of course also along the line of one of the most fundamental
principles of bidding theory – the most well-known example is of
course Stayman. To use the 1-step bid on more hands gives economy to
your bidding. Although economy may not be of a prime importance in
this particular case it nicely brings together most hands that usually
are _not_ interesting and thus makes other, higher bids, more precise
than in standard bidding.
Follow up: When it goes 1x – D- P – 1step Doubler will normally bid 1
step himself to allow advancer to bid his longest suit, where he wants
to play.
HISTORY
It was some 20 years ago that the Carrot team here in Sweden began
playing 1S – D – P – 1NT as a Herbert negative. They thought the
sacrifice of the "natural positive" 1NT response was a small price to
pay for, e.g., being able not to have to jump to 3H with Jxxx in
hearts and 10p. In their system this 1NT bid indicates up to about 8p
if you have a flat uninteresting hand.
Then a little later I started playing Herbert after all 1 of a suit
openings. Again using the 1-step bid as the negative. But only after
direct doubles, after protective doubles I used Rosenkranz's ideas.
However, I was alone, but not forever...
In 1996 I and my partner was up against Wirgren-Bennet (Swedish
bidding theorists of rank) in the bidding challenge in the British
Bridge Magazine. On one deal it went 3C – P – P – D and second hand
had some 8-9 points and a four card major. At both tables we responded
with 3 in this major. My partner raised to 4 on something like a good
20-count and we played there, "making six". However, at the other
table they reached the slam. In fact, at that table 3H was positive
because 3D would have been a Herbert negative! Huh. Consequently I
immediately widened the application of Herbert in my own system.
A couple of years later I got together in a very serious system
developing project together with Sweden's foremost bidding
theoretician. To be the foremost B.T. in any country is something to
take pride in, to be it in Sweden is something more than that since
system development in my country always has been a cherished practise
and the federation has been, relatively speaking, liberal in its
attitude vs new systems/conventions. But back on track. He, the F.B.T.
had also experimented with Herbert and had some very useful ideas. The
main thing that the Herbert negative really shouldn't be that... It
should be a Herbert negative/positive! I will explain.
OUR APPROACH
In simplicity.
In response to a T/O D of 1 of a suit or 2/3C
1 step a) negative b) FG almost all hands
(Herbert plus cue is FG, Herbert plus jump is nat and NF)
else nonjump = nat and constructive
jump = nat and G/T, as in any system
cue = specifically G/T and 1 round force
After the 1x – D- P the Herbert negative is 0-5.
After 1x – P – P –D it is 0-8
After 2C/3C it is 0-7, regardless if it is 2nd/4th that doubles.
After P-1X-P-P; D it is 0-12
SPECIALITIES
However. Special sequences occur.
1H – D – P – 1S
Now we play 1NT as nat and 2C as the weak relay.
After 1M – D – P – Herbert
we play 2D by doubler as ELC.
After 1H – D – P – 1S; P-2C-P a 2NT bid by advancer is nat w/ 6-9,
i.e. a third alternative, of medium strength, is incorporated into the
Herbert.
There are more.
Our first system design of this Herbert concept was about six pages.
No one managed to learn it all so we have made it easier. But if you
want you can spend a lot of time discussing e.g. all kinds of 2NT bids
that pop up. E.g.
1H – D – P – 2H
P - 2NT
What should that be? My friend, the F.B.T., advocated that it should
promise shortness in hearts!
SOME PRO:s
It is nice for doubler to know that advancer has some strength when it
goes 1x – D- P – any non-jump except Herbert.
It is very good to know that the direct cue is specifically a 1-round
force. This is a traditional trouble area in standard bidding.
Weak distributional advancers with good playing strength can start
with the negative and then bid aggressively without being afraid of
overstating their high card strength.
In general you can say that the 1 step multi bid gives you two ways to
bid on strong hands, i.e. the same philosophy as behind lebensohl.
ALL CONTRA:s... :-)
You cannot play in the Herbert domination. After 1H-D-P we cannot play
in 1S. After 3C-D-P we cannot play in 3D.
When doubler has extra strength and the bidding in standard would have
been e.g. 1D-D-P-1H: P–1S we have to bid 2S/cue. But of course, since
we know advancer is weak we may still bid just 1S and see what happens
(it all depends on how strong 2nd hand is and how wide the ranges of
the negative is, this may be a problem or not).
The existence of the artificial negative of course gives the opponents
a chance to make a lead-directing double which even may end up in them
contracting in that strain.
If it goes e.g. 1x - D - P - Negative; 2x we will sometimes be
preempted and not find our fit.
EXPANSION
While the years pass on new players overtake the position as dominant
in system development on the national scene and as always younger
players look up to those "on top", whatever that means. The F.B.T. for
example is nowadays the one who writes the Swedish equivalent of the
Master's Solver's Club in the Bridge World. Hence now and then readers
of the Swedish bridge magazine can read that "this problem would be
solved by using Herbert", and so this idea is spreading and more and
more people are beginning asking about it. But we are not that many
yet, but we are an increasing number. It's like the support double. I
was almost alone using it over here, for some 10 years, don't know how
rapidly it became popular in its land of birth, the USA. Anyhow, since
some 5 years back it is considered standard by many young players! But
older players tend not to adopt them. My guess is that old players are
just as conservative in Sweden as they are in other countries. The
difference I believe is the young ones that live here are brought up
in an open atmosphere and hence are open-minded towards progress. I
wished the ACBL/WBF also was that but I am afraid they are not. They
are mostly interested in protecting the old players whose brains
mostly works by using well-used, often swirling, paths instead of
being inclined to constructing a new and straight asfalt road right
out of the jungle. If these old players see such a new road they
probably say "hey what is this asfalt thingy, I have never encountered
it before and am CONFUSED... I need PROTECTION!" If only all old
players had the vitality of e.g. Alvin Roth who in his Picture Bidding
advocates that 1NT-2C; 2H-3H should show a singleton heart! Hey, that
is man whose brain is still working in his eighties and who is
interested in conquering new land, not in re-tracking in his own
foot-steps.
But now we are getting out of the subject and into hot stuff and I
must stop writing. I want to emphahsize. At the end I just let my
thoughts wander on a favourite topic of mine. I did not intend to
indicate that in WBF/ACBL-land this Herbert convention is not allowed.
It is allowed by the WBF and even I would be surprised if it turned
out to be regulated by the ACBL (no doubt I will rapidly be informed
if it is).
Hopefully this was to your satisfaction David.
Yours
Daniel
Peter Gill
>> Quoting from this entry "It was advocated by Walter Herbert when he
>> was a member of the Austrian team in the 30's ..."
>
>IIRC he was a member of the Austrian "Wunderteam" that dominated
>European bridge in the (late) thirties and in contrast to some of his
>team members he escaped the nazis after Anschluss and survived. I
>believe he got a work as conductor at an opera house in Texas
>(Houston?).
Spot on. The entry for Walter Herbert in the back of the same
encyclopedia confirms what you wrote, adding that after Houston
he became conductor of the San Diego Opera.
>BTW In Sweden there is presently something of a revival of the Herbert
>Negative. Not wide-spread yet but we are a growing group. We use it in
>response to T/O doubles in certain positions (not to strong
>2-openings, hardly any play such). Some in few positions, other in
>many.
Thanks for the follow-up post too - very interesting.
Peter Gill
Australia.