[Cascade]

1♣ (Dbl) 1NT (Pass)
Pass (2♠) Pass (Pass)
Dbl?

1♣ is natural
1NT denies a biddable suit at the one-level so normally shows clubs.

[OleBerg]

Penalty.

Normally a strong believer in T-O doubles, but this is taking things too far.

I will much rather retain the option of penalizing the opponent, than having the option to "take the chance in 1NT" (as opposed to describing my hand with 2♣), and then invite partner to bid at the 3-level.

[Poky]

Pure takeout.

Something like:
xx
xxxx
AKx
AKxx

Trying to catch best minor fit (p can have some (32)53 hand).

Doubling partial contracts for penalty when isn't sure that our side has more than 21 HCP and when opponents show a strong one-suiter is much more than absurd!!!

[FrancesHinden]

Penalties.

Yes, it's a very strange auction (so much so that I'm certain I've never had it), but I don't need a take-out double; if I want to compete I compete in clubs.

Quote

(p can have some (32)53 hand).

My partners can't. They have this novel idea that when they have a choice between bidding a 5-card suit at the one level and playing in a NT contract with the weaker hand declarer, they should go for the former.

[pclayton]

Penalties. I can easily hold 4♠ and a max pass of 1N.

[Rossoneri]

Never had such a situation before, but I am more inclined with the above arguments for penalties.

[joker_gib]

Rossoneri, on Oct 21 2008, 04:35 PM, said:

Never had such a situation before, but I am more inclined with the above arguments for penalties.

Same for me.

[P_Marlowe]

For us, it would be t/o.

But opener wont be surprised, if it gets passed out,
so call it optional, if you dont like penalty.

Denying a biddable suit may also mean, that the
1NT bidder did look at 2345 in spades and a 4333
distribution.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdonn]

P_Marlowe, on Oct 21 2008, 12:09 PM, said:

For us, it would be t/o.

But opener wont be surprised, if it gets passed out,
so call it optional, if you dont like penalty.

Denying a biddable suit may also mean, that the
1NT bidder did look at 2345 in spades and a 4333
distribution.

With kind regards
Marlowe

And why in the world would I want to defend 2♠X when there is a strong hand with spades on my right if I have 5432 of spades and my partner is short?

[marcD]

points (penalty oriented ) at pairs , t/o at imps (small doubleton spade or Ax in a fair balanced hand). Partner may have 4 spades and leave it in . Don' t see how i could have a penalty double with long trumps over mine

[gnasher]

marcD, on Oct 21 2008, 07:32 PM, said:

Don' t see how i could have a penalty double with long trumps over mine

It might not be that likely, but it's not impossible. How about QJ109 Axx AK xxxx ?

[keylime]

Penalty with me. Since pard didn't bid anything of note except a 1NT, not even a trashy diamond, should be a hand that likely is on both majors with 3 clubs or 4225 and prime controls.

[karlson]

I think it's takeout, something like x Axxx AJxx KQxx or xx Kxx Axx AKxxx. I don't think the argument that we're unlikely to want to compete in any suit but clubs makes it penalty -- we might want to compete in 3c or defend 2sx, and partner couldn't compete to 3c by himself not knowing we have extra clubs. So takeout, but I would expect 3c to be the final contract maybe 2/3 of the time, with 2sx most of the rest, and the occasional 3red (we could certainly have 4-4 diamond fit).

[Apollo81]

Penalty, because we will nearly always compete in clubs if we compete, and playing penalty doubles here is pretty much the only way to punish the opponents if they step out of line.

Agree that this auction is pretty unlikely to occur, ever.

[rogerclee]

Penalty, I have 2NT for a takeout. It would be infrequent that partner would want to defend 2♠x with at most 3 spades (or 4 very bad ones).

[jdonn]

I hadn't thought about this before, but the arguments for penalty seem overwhelming to me even if at first instinct it may be counterintuitive.

[Cascade]

I too hadn't thought about it before when it came up at the table.

I was playing with a pick-up partner who I have only ever played with once or twice before and the last time was in the same one-night event a year ago.

I couldn't see how she could would want to make a takeout double so assumed it was penalites.

She had some 1=4=4=4 hand and indeed intended it as takeout - goodness knows what she was going to bid over a 1♠ response from (weak NT opening context).

We misdefended and 2♠X made two overtricks - it was cold for 8 tricks.

[flytoox]

I think Lawrence discussed this sequence in his book, "Double".

This should be treated as a takeout dbl but pd can convert it if he holds good spade. You should hold sth like

xx, Axx, Akxx, Kxxx

THe reason is that if you hold long spade, then as it is in front of the 2S bidder, you will not get many trump tricks.

If pd has good spade holding ,he pass your dbl. Otherwise, he bid a suit.

[Cascade]

flytoox, on Oct 24 2008, 04:08 PM, said:

I think Lawrence discussed this sequence in his book, "Double".

This should be treated as a takeout dbl but pd can convert it if he holds good spade. You should hold sth like

xx, Axx, Akxx, Kxxx

THe reason is that if you hold long spade, then as it is in front of the 2S bidder, you will not get many trump tricks.

If pd has good spade holding ,he pass your dbl. Otherwise, he bid a suit.

Except that the 1NT bidder will have some spades on this auction otherwise he would raise clubs rather than bid 1NT.

[cherdano]

flytoox, on Oct 23 2008, 09:08 PM, said:

I think Lawrence discussed this sequence in his book, "Double".

This should be treated as a takeout dbl but pd can convert it if he holds good spade. You should hold sth like

xx, Axx, Akxx, Kxxx

THe reason is that if you hold long spade, then as it is in front of the 2S bidder, you will not get many trump tricks.

If pd has good spade holding ,he pass your dbl. Otherwise, he bid a suit.

I would rather be able to double them when the trumps are 4-2, with 4 trumps onside, then when they are 3-2, with 3 offside.
I can't quite believe yet that this very auction is defined as takeout by Lawrence.