[awm]

1♦ - P - 1NT - P
P - X

What is the double?

[vuroth]

Trap passer.

[Blofeld]

I think the first and fourth options are the sensible ones. Of the two I prefer the fourth.

[iggygork]

Penalty double of diamonds.

[helene_t]

I dunno what I think, but Frances plays it as penalty if I recall correctly.

[jocdelevat]

just curios what 1nt response after 1d openinng means? to me looks like no 4 card major and no 4 diamonds so should be 3334 or a variotion of 2335 hand.
I will take x as 4/4 majors.

[manudude03]

You would probably have to ask then why the initial 1♦ bid wasn't doubled. This discussion came up when I was playing last night. There wasn't a 1♦ bid and it was only a hypothetical question (one of the opps said after the hand they were going to double 1NT after already passed on the first round). It was only a beginners competition though, so no experts logic or anything, but we came to the conclusion that it would either show a 2 suiter (such as clubs and a M) or a weak single suiter in a minor (forcing a 2♣ response like Helvic) that would be too weak to make a normal overcall (to distinguish between a very weak 3136 and a 2245 with 8-11HCP forsay). I think the same thing can be applied to this auction, but at a slightly lower range for a direct overcall of 1NT.

NB: I meant either the single suiter OR the double suiter, not the two integrated together.

[pclayton]

It depends entitely on your agreement. There's two ways to play it:

A. Penalty, with some kind of diamond cards that couldn't act over 1♦ or,

B. Takeout of diamonds, but not strong enough for initial action.

With most of my pards we play "A", but we also have some sort of takeout mechanism. With some its 2♣, which is some sort of general takeout. I've also heard of playing some kind of DONT structure here.

[joker_gib]

Without any agreement, I take this as a t/o of diamonds that wasn't strong enough for direct action.

Alain

[helene_t]

I can imagine playing it as some double-shooter between t/o and penalty, say 4441 with opening strength. Responder has clubs on this auction so doubler will often be short in clubs, and doubling for penalties has the disadvantage that they can run to clubs.

Not that I want to play this (it should be almost specifcally 4441 to be helpful to p, and even then I might have overcalled 1♥ if the hearts are decent).

Just wanted to mention this possibility as I think it came up when this problem was presented to the expert panel of the Dutch BF magazine (Ladderpuzzel).

[whereagles]

Isn't this one of those "Lawrence two-way doubles"? I.e. pard looks at his hand: if he's short on diamonds, it's pen and asks for a diamond lead. If he's long, it's a weak take-out.

[FrancesHinden]

helene_t, on Oct 31 2007, 12:10 AM, said:

I dunno what I think, but Frances plays it as penalty if I recall correctly.

Yes

Quote

I play it as a good hand with diamonds, but whenever the opps bid this vs me they have some random t/o X and go for a number.

Yes

[han]

I play it as penalty as well.

[skjaeran]

Penalty, penalty, penalty....

[awm]

Seems like I play this differently than most people. Here's my view:

(1) Weak takeout doesn't make all that much sense. The opponents haven't found a fit. Odds are good we don't have a great fit either. If our diamond cards are in partner's hand (in front of the diamond bidder) and our club cards are in my hand (in front of the 1NT bidder) then things are looking somewhat grim for a contract by our side...

(2) The major+clubs hand is not that likely, since people like to bid 1M or 2♣ on these hands (or raptor or roman jump or something over 1♦ if playing that). Even when we do have the major+clubs hand, LHO is often sitting on a stack of clubs.

(3) While it certainly makes sense to double with a "penalty double of diamonds" hand, how frequently does this come up? If LHO bid 1NT on a hand with a lot of clubs, then they usually have a safe place to play in 2♣ so you're not really going to "get them." And if LHO has a balanced hand, the odds of our actually having a big stack of diamonds are pretty slim (i.e. LHO has three diamonds, RHO has four diamonds, and we have five diamonds and most of the remaining points? possible... I wouldn't bet on it).

My preference is to play double as something like a weak notrump with a good diamond holding. Often this auction (1♦-P-1NT-A/P) opponents have only half the strength or even less (say 6 opposite 12) and if we know that cards are poorly placed for them (i.e. our diamonds behind their diamonds) they will often go down. This double also helps partner get in with a 5-card major and a weakish hand, since the double promises some tolerance for whatever partner's suit might happen to be.

I actually thought this was fairly standard... and this method effects my call on some of the example hands from another thread, where a lot of people felt compelled to double with diamond length/strength and some support for the majors (even 3-3 in the majors!) because they "would have trouble getting in later."