[jillybean]

On the + side, Ive just learned a lot about reopening doubles Thanks for the replies

[Stephen Tu]

Facing a lower level overcall, one reopens with a double with shortness in the overcalled suit and support for the unbids very routinely. You have multiple ways to win, partner can have a penalty pass, you may have a making contract/good sac in another suit, you can push them up a level & beat them.

At higher levels (2s+), like here, there are differing schools of thought. One school says opener nearly always reopens with shortness even with minimums. This has the advantage of "getting them" most of the times you are getting them. But it has significant disadvantages as well, more can go wrong. A fairly large portion of the time responder didn't pass because he had a penalty double but couldn't make one, he passed since he was too weak to bid anything. Opener reopens, responder pulls, maybe 4th hand cracks you. Or he has some trump length, gambles a penalty pass, but since both hands are minimum they make it. Or fearing this sort of thing, he pulls, but this goes down while the opp's contract was going down 1 (opener had extras this time), you've pulled a plus to a minus.

The second school requires high level re-opening doubles to have extra values also. This makes responder's decisions holding the weaker hands easier, when he pulls this the high 4 level minor contract is more likely to make, if he passes you are more likely to beat it. But the downside is that as responder you can't go for the penalty double as often. With a vulnerable game here & non-vul opps, you simply don't take the chance that opener can't reopen, and just bid 3nt or whatever. You lose the chance at +800 but don't ever bring back +250 either when you are surely 600+ in your own contract.

I am firmly in the second camp. Playing negative doubles entails gains on the hands where you have the neg double but losses on some hands where you have a penalty double. If you try to recoup all the penalty doubles by having opener always reopen, my feeling is you lose more in the long run than the gains you pick up on boards like this one.

[jdonn]

Stephen Tu, on Aug 26 2008, 12:07 PM, said:

I am firmly in the second camp. Playing negative doubles entails gains on the hands where you have the neg double but losses on some hands where you have a penalty double. If you try to recoup all the penalty doubles by having opener always reopen, my feeling is you lose more in the long run than the gains you pick up on boards like this one.

Are you saying you would have passed it out on the actual north hand? I hope not, because that would be quite poor advice. Jilly of course your partner was wrong that you MUST reopen with double, but with perfect shape and great controls like you actually had, you definitely should have doubled. Even if partner makes a marginal penalty pass you will easily be it most of the time.

[Lobowolf]

jdonn, on Aug 26 2008, 12:46 PM, said:

Even if partner makes a marginal penalty pass you will easily be it most of the time.

Agree with this post in its entirety, but I wanted to add that in my opinion, to the extent that there's a danger, it's not that you won't beat it when partner sits, but that partner might not sit with a hand that's beating it, when the preempt is on the heavy side and the preemptor's partner took a conservative view. I'm pretty sure on the auction that you'll get 5 tricks against hearts, but less sure that you'll get 9 or 10 in partner's suit of choice if he runs.

[Stephen Tu]

jdonn, on Aug 26 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

Are you saying you would have passed it out on the actual north hand? I hope not, because that would be quite poor advice.

Poor why? I am not passing with the South hand playing with the second camp philosophy.

If you always double with North hand, you will give South a lot more borderline penalty pass decisions. You are going to bring back -530 more often, and also -100 when +50/ +100 was available.

You will get +800 instead of 660 on this board, but I think I will get it back on the other boards when the south/west cards are rearranged. Maybe I'm wrong, but really one has to run a simulation to try & prove things one way or the other rather than just labeling something as "quite poor" with little justification.

[jdonn]

Stephen Tu, on Aug 26 2008, 02:46 PM, said:

jdonn, on Aug 26 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

Are you saying you would have passed it out on the actual north hand? I hope not, because that would be quite poor advice.

Poor why?

Because the odds are extremely large partner has a penalty pass when you are this weak with short hearts, and your hand has fantastic defense opposite one.

Quote

Maybe I'm wrong, but really one has to run a simulation to try & prove things one way or the other rather than just labeling something as "quite poor" with little justification.

One doesn't need to do anything. Passing out 3♥ with the north hand is indeed quite poor. My experience and logic both tell me so, and are backed up by knowing that virtually all experts would reopen, which is also something I feel no need to prove as I know it's true.

[Walddk]

jdonn, on Aug 26 2008, 10:44 PM, said:

Quote

Maybe I'm wrong, but really one has to run a simulation to try & prove things one way or the other rather than just labeling something as "quite poor" with little justification.

One doesn't need to do anything. Passing out 3♥ with the north hand is indeed quite poor. My experience and logic both tell me so, and are backed up by knowing that virtually all experts would reopen, which is also something I feel no need to prove as I know it's true.

People who do would be better off if they discard negative doubles. If you play them, and heaven knows that there is hardly a better convention available, you do not lose the penalty double.

It's just a matter of making opener co-operate with a reopening double. Thus it's not safe at all to overcall on rotten values just because the opponents play negative doubles. Sometimes even sound overcalls get penalised.

Roland

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

Because the odds are extremely large partner has a penalty pass when you are this weak with short hearts

"Extremely large" is an overstatement. Give preempter 7 hearts, great majority of the time the remaining hearts are going to be 3-2 either way between the other hands rather than partner having 4 or 5. And some reasonable % of the time when partner has the length they are poor spots and West has enough aces for them to make, didn't raise because of misfit. So you turn some +100 into +300, but 2 of those are almost wiped out by one -140 into -530. And if South just bids 3nt when appropriate playing the other style instead of going for the penalty, some of the larger penalties you get, +500/800 are basically pushed with +600/630.

I know a large group of experts will auto-reopen with shortness, but I don't think this is universal nor do I think it's necessarily right even if they happen to be in the majority right now.

Quote

People who do would be better off if they discard negative doubles. If you play them, and heaven knows that there is hardly a better convention available, you do not lose the penalty double

That's a totally silly argument. You gain a lot from having the negative double available on the neg-x hands. Even if you lose some from not getting every penalty available, that's still a net gain. If you play the auto-reopen w/ shortness even when min double, you get more of your penalty doubles back, but you also lose some from
- doubling them into game
- pulling + into minus when borderline from fear of doubling them into game
- inaccuracy in further bidding (does responder with a max pass jump to game opposite what could be a min, does opener with extras raise responder's pull since he hasn't shown extras yet?)

[Lobowolf]

Stephen Tu, on Aug 26 2008, 04:43 PM, said:

Quote

Because the odds are extremely large partner has a penalty pass when you are this weak with short hearts

"Extremely large" is an overstatement. Give preempter 7 hearts, great majority of the time the remaining hearts are going to be 3-2 either way between the other hands rather than partner having 4 or 5.

This seems to examine the a priori odds that partner will have a penalty pass, other things being equal. Because opener is minimal, and 2nd hand preempted, look at the expected distribution of the missing HCP; partner rates to have enough values to take action a strong majority of the time, yet chose not to. Given those conditions, parter should be a very strong favorite to have a penalty pass. The question isn't

"How often will partner have a penalty pass of hearts when my hand is X, and second seat preempts?"

but rather,

"Give my hand of this strength and distribution, if partner passes over a preempt, how likely is it that the reason for his pass is that he wants to penalize hearts?"

The first answer might be "not terribly often," based partly on the reasons you gave, but the second answer is quite different. Because of the number of outstanding HCP, on a good chunk of those 2-heart or 3-heart hands, partner did something other than pass.

[awm]

We can argue a lot about the exact parameters, but I think the point here is:

When opener balances with a double at the three-level or above, it is not enough just to have shortness in the opposing suit. Opener should also have good defense in case partner converts the double.

It seems obvious to balance with:

♠ATxxx
♥x
♦Axx
♣Axxx

You have the right shape, and your three aces should be plenty to defeat 3♥ if partner converts. The quick tricks will also help if partner has a very long minor suit and not quite enough to bid on his own, and tries 5m. On the other hand, it seems obvious to pass with:

♠KQxxx
♥x
♦QJx
♣KJxx

Here you might take zero tricks on defense (more likely one or two). It is easy to imagine partner converting the double with a couple of trump tricks and nothing else, and 3♥X making. If partner tries five of a minor you could be off three or four tops.

The actual hand is somewhere in between the extremes.

[Stephen Tu]

Oops 1100 you're right on the actual board.

+1 for awm's post. I could possibly be persuaded that I'm on the wrong side of the line on the actual North hand, but I'm definitely not ever passing the South hand at these colors.

[neilkaz]

Jlall, on Aug 26 2008, 05:28 PM, said:

Anyways I agree with your point that you should not automatically reopen with the right shape, but I disagree with your definition of "extras" if you are implying this hand is not good enough. I'm with Adam that quick tricks should be a huge factor with minimum range HCP hands, they are big for both offense and defense on these type of hands. This hand is a "minimum" but you have a very nice hand if partner sits your double or if he bids something so I am happy to reopen with it.

Justin's point here is key to understanding why opener, in spite of only 12 HCP really has to reopen this particular hand.

.. neilkaz ..

[Walddk]

I had this hand in a Cayne match a couple of weeks ago:

Scoring: IMP

---

1♣* (3♠) pass (pass)
??

* 2+ cards

I played with Jon Sveindal (jbgood), and our agreement was negative doubles through 4♠ (double of 4♠ more like card showing than negative). Anyway, I had to decide whether to reopen with a double or pass, vulnerable against not.

What would you do?

Roland

[fred]

IMO the reason there is so much confusion here among beginners and intermediates (and being a Life Master does not mean you are necessarily any better than that) is a function of how negative doubles are taught to new players.

Near the end of the lesson, the teacher who is introducing this convention will typically ask the student "so what do you do if you have a hand that is appropriate for a penalty double?". The teacher then provides the stock answer - "you pass, partner reopens with a double, and everything works out fine". If the student is lucky the teacher might provide an example deal where everything will indeed work out fine. That is typically the end of the lesson, the student thinks he/she understands, and it typically takes several years (if not forever) for the student to realize that this whole area is a lot more complicated than the teacher makes it seem.

As a result it is a commonly held belief among non-experts (including many Life Masters) that, as opener, you should ALWAYS reopen with a double just in case your partner has a penalty pass. Jilly's partner seems to be cut from this mold

This is such an absurd concept that I am not even going to add my usual "IMO" to my opinion of just how absurd it is.

Really all such problems, just like many other bidding problems, are basically judgment calls. I think that is what both Josh and Stephen are saying, even though their respective judgments (both of which are good enough IMO to deserve respect) are not exactly in line with that of the other.

As some others have pointed out, as a general rule:

- The shorter you are in the opponent's suit, the more you should be inclined to reopen with a double. For example, if you had the same hand with 5233 distribution, double would be a lot less attractive (because if your partner takes out your double, which is much more likely when you have 2 hearts, the disaster potential is magnified).

- The higher the level of the overcall, the more you should care about having sound defensive values when you reopen with a double. For example, awm's example hand that might not win a single trick on defense does not make for an attractive reopening double at the 3-level despite the perfect shape (because your lack of defense means they are more likely to make their contract).

- Having true support for all unbid suits, even if you are short in the opponent's suit, is often important. For example, if you have a similar hand with 5125 distribution, double is less attractive (because the chances of partner bidding diamonds have increased and you really don't want that to happen).

Being good at weighing all of these factors is not easy, but just knowing they should be considered and doing your best to consider them will leave you FAR ahead of those who believe you should "ALWAYS reopen with double".

Also, once you understand that you cannot count on your thoughtful partner to ALWAYS reopen with a double, you will learn to trap pass less than you might be doing now. In particular:

- If you have a hand with a lot of high cards, trap passing becomes less attractive (because the more you have the less there is for partner to have and he may not think he has enough defense to reopen with a double of a high-level overcall and also because the more you have the more you care about "missing something" if partner does not have an appropriate hand for reopening). The more vulnerable you are and the less vulnerable they are, the more this is true.

- If you have a big fit for your partner, trap passing becomes less attractive (because this decreases the chances that the bidding will continue P-P-DBL-P-P-P and if it doesn't go this way it might be hard for you to catch up).

In my experience, as a general rule I would say that trap passing with either a strong hand or a good fit for opener's suit especially when you are vulnerable is a bad strategy.

In my experience, overuse of the reopening double is one of the most common bidding mistakes that non-experts (including many Life Masters) make.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jdonn]

Stephen Tu, on Aug 26 2008, 04:43 PM, said:

Give preempter 7 hearts, great majority of the time the remaining hearts are going to be 3-2 either way between the other hands rather than partner having 4 or 5.  And some reasonable % of the time when partner has the length they are poor spots and West has enough aces for them to make, didn't raise because of misfit.  So you turn some +100 into +300, but 2 of those are almost wiped out by one -140 into -530.  And if South just bids 3nt when appropriate playing the other style instead of going for the penalty, some of the larger penalties you get, +500/800 are basically pushed with +600/630.

This is a very unfair assessment. The preemptor most often has 7, with 6 next most likely, and anything else extremely unlikely. Also, partner CLEARLY averages more length than RHO since neither 1♠ nor 3♥ was raised. I can truly say I would be shocked, completely shocked to have partner pass a reopening double and see them make. A large number is simply far more likely given that partner has passed the double, and partner passing is going to be his most likely action. If he doesn't pass, the only thing he could do to upset me is 3NT and even that could be making (xx Kxx xx Axxxxx?)

Quote

I know a large group of experts will auto-reopen with shortness, but I don't think this is universal nor do I think it's necessarily right even if they happen to be in the majority right now.

I didn't say they auto-reopen with shortness. I said the given hand is a clear reopen.

Fred said:

As some others have pointed out, as a general rule:

- The shorter you are in the opponent's suit, the more you should be inclined to reopen with a double. For example, if you had the same hand with 5233 distribution, double would be a lot less attractive (because if your partner takes out your double, which is much more likely when you have 2 hearts, the disaster potential is magnified).

- The higher the level of the overcall, the more you should care about having sound defensive values when you reopen with a double. For example, awm's example hand that might not win a single trick on defense does not make for an attractive reopening double at the 3-level despite the perfect shape (because your lack of defense means they are more likely to make their contract).

- Having true support for all unbid suits, even if you are short in the opponent's suit, is often important. For example, if you have a similar hand with 5125 distribution, double is less attractive (because the chances of partner bidding diamonds have increased and you really don't want that to happen).

Being good at weighing all of these factors is not easy, but just knowing they should be considered and doing your best to consider them will leave you FAR ahead of those who believe you should "ALWAYS reopen with double".

Absolutely well put. The hand Jilly held would in fact be a great teaching example, because despite being a minimum range opening bid, it so well meets all the factors you mention that reopening can be expected to be a big winner.

[benlessard]

♠ 5
♥ Q964
♦ Q102
♣ AKJ64


1♣* (3♠) pass (pass)
??

No, not close.

x
Axxx
Axxx
Axxx

isnt a X for me. My reopening X ALWAYS some slight extras except over 2m. In MP or against weaker players trap passing make sense but against stronger player and in imps trap-passing is only when you are unsure of having the values for game.

Quote

I know a large group of experts will auto-reopen with shortness, but I don't think this is universal nor do I think it's necessarily right even if they happen to be in the majority right now.

Agree 100%

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on Aug 26 2008, 10:29 AM, said:

My partner here told me this “anytime opener's partner passes an opps direct overcall, if overcaller's partner passes, opener must reopen with a X” and that didn’t sound right to me.  You know that these partners have far more experience than I do, most of them being life masters. Other than the fundamentals, the average ‘expert’ whom I get to play with is not playing what I learn here. It all adds to my confusion and drives me crazy.

The most important thing you can learn here, is the ability to ask
the right questions.
The good players on the forum will tell you their answers, and in
some answers, you will find the reasons, why they answered
a certain question a certain way, ... those answers you should read
at least twice.
Most of the time, the players will have looked at various issues / points
and weighted them against each other.
Getting to know the important issues / points is the 2nd thing you can learn
here, ... the weithing has to be done by yourself, because there are factors,
which are specific for the enviroment you are playing in, the most importent
factor is the knowledge about your partner

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

fred, on Aug 27 2008, 12:54 AM, said:

[....] how negative doubles are taught to new players. [....]
"so what do you do if you have a hand that is appropriate for a penalty double?". [.....]
"you pass, partner reopens with a double, and everything works out fine". [.....]
As a result it is a commonly held belief among non-experts (including many Life Masters) that, as opener, you should ALWAYS reopen with a double

Interesting. Maybe this is taught in different ways in different places. Both in Netherlands and UK my experience is that people at the clubs are a lot less prone to reopen with a double than are the experts in the panels of our magazines.

My immediate thought when I saw this "you should always reopen with a double" comment was that he was over-simplifying in a misguided attempt to be didactic.

[jillybean]

There have been many excellent responses to this thread and it has been a great learning experience for me, and others I hope.
One more question...

Dealer: North Vul: NS Scoring: IMP

♠ K84 ♥ AKT86 ♦ 54 ♣ AQ9

West North East South

 -     1♠    3♥    ?  

Would you pass here trusting partner to reopen with a X or is this a 4♥ bid?