[CSGibson]

Auction goes (starting with partner):
2♣-(2♥)-X*-(2♠),
X-(P)-?

*denying a control or enough to respond to 1♣

2♥ and 2♠ are ostensibly natural calls.

My question is whether it is standard for partner's X to be takeout or penalty?

[helene_t]

Would pass by opener have been forcing?

If no then double is t/o.

If yes then I am not sure. I would like to play it as optional but would probably take it as penalty with an unknown p.

[bluecalm]

No idea about standard but I would play that if responder double wasn't negative ie. doesn't show anything about shape then opener's double is takeout.
If responder's double is negative then opener's double is penalty according to general principle that if we make t/o double suggesting some suits (here negative double suggesting spades) and then they bid that suit the double is penalty.

[Phil]

We are in a force, so double is TO.

[cherdanno]

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 10:08 AM, said:

We are in a force, so double is TO.

Typo?

[Phil]

cherdanno, on Aug 2 2010, 10:09 AM, said:

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 10:08 AM, said:

We are in a force, so double is TO.

Typo?

You don't think we are in a force?

Thanks for the out by the way.

I play 2♣ is an unconditional force through 2N, 3M or 4m, regardless of whats happening around the table, but I don't know if thats standard, or that a TO double is standard as well.

[jdonn]

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 10:12 AM, said:

cherdanno, on Aug 2 2010, 10:09 AM, said:

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 10:08 AM, said:

We are in a force, so double is TO.

Typo?

You don't think we are in a force?

Thanks for the out by the way.

I play 2♣ is an unconditional force through 2N, 3M or 4m, regardless of whats happening around the table, but I don't know if thats standard, or that a TO double is standard as well.

I think the point is "we are in a force" would generally lead to a conclusion that doubles are penalty.

[pooltuna]

jdonn, on Aug 2 2010, 10:26 AM, said:

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 10:12 AM, said:

cherdanno, on Aug 2 2010, 10:09 AM, said:

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 10:08 AM, said:

We are in a force, so double is TO.

Typo?

You don't think we are in a force?

Thanks for the out by the way.

I play 2♣ is an unconditional force through 2N, 3M or 4m, regardless of whats happening around the table, but I don't know if thats standard, or that a TO double is standard as well.

I think the point is "we are in a force" would generally lead to a conclusion that doubles are penalty.

They got at least 3 other forcing calls available so why do so many need a TOX. Use it as GOD intended, PENALTY!!!!

[nigel_k]

Penalty is standard but TBH I don't really understand the logic behind double being penalty because we are in a force. If I have a penalty double, partner can still double for takeout, or I can double for takeout and show a more flexible variation of whatever I bid next.

[jdonn]

nigel_k, on Aug 2 2010, 03:58 PM, said:

Penalty is standard but TBH I don't really understand the logic behind double being penalty because we are in a force. If I have a penalty double, partner can still double for takeout, or I can double for takeout and show a more flexible variation of whatever I bid next.

Or they psych, as people often do over 2♣ opening bids, and just steal your 5-5 fit?

[bluecalm]

Quote

We are in a force, so double is TO.

+1, I play the same way.
It's for sure not standard though

[nigel_k]

jdonn, on Aug 3 2010, 10:02 AM, said:

nigel_k, on Aug 2 2010, 03:58 PM, said:

Penalty is standard but TBH I don't really understand the logic behind double being penalty because we are in a force. If I have a penalty double, partner can still double for takeout, or I can double for takeout and show a more flexible variation of whatever I bid next.

Or they psych, as people often do over 2♣ opening bids, and just steal your 5-5 fit?

Maybe, but we're still in a force. If I pass and partner doesn't double then often we can still smell it out. And it would be a pity to make a penalty double when LHO was about to raise RHO's pysche to some high level.

[foo]

CSGibson, on Aug 2 2010, 09:45 AM, said:

Auction goes (starting with partner):
2♣-(2♥)-X*-(2♠),
X-(P)-?

*denying a control or enough to respond to 1♣

2♥ and 2♠ are ostensibly natural calls.

My question is whether it is standard for partner's X to be takeout or penalty?

Partnership Agreement territory.

Esp if Resp's X shows a negative, O may not have enough defense in hand to set the opponents enough in a two level contract to garner a good score.

...and if the 2C opening is a massive one suiter, They may actually have enough of Their trumps to MAKE Their two level contract.
(for instance, picture a 2C opening with a 7+m and give the Opposition LOT'S of Major suit cards and none or virtually none of Our minor in one of Their hands.)

[Phil]

jdonn, on Aug 2 2010, 04:02 PM, said:

Or they psych, as people often do over 2♣ opening bids, and just steal your 5-5 fit?

Josh if your partner opened 2♣ and then doubled 2♠ and you happened to be looking at ♠Jxxxx, would you be confident enough to pass thinking he had a penalty x?

[aguahombre]

Pass is the Takeout, I think. Double for penalty, I think. Actually that is more thinking than I am used to.

[peachy]

Penalty. Opener typically has the hand that would have rebid 2NT without all this busy-ness from the opponents. We are in force, so double is then always penalty. With a one-suiter, opener will bid his suit if he thinks that opposite a yarboro he has better chances for a plus by bidding.

You can have different agreements in place, but without agreements and with a reasonable partner, this is how it "is".

[H_KARLUK]

CSGibson, on Aug 2 2010, 10:45 AM, said:

Auction goes (starting with partner): 
2♣-(2♥)-X*-(2♠),
X-(P)-?

*denying a control or enough to respond to 1♣

2♥ and 2♠ are ostensibly natural calls.

My question is whether it is standard for partner's X to be takeout or penalty?

In an ostensible manner; avowedly (Openly acknowledged or declared; admitted.)
; professedly; visibly I did not get "t h" 1st or 2nd or both Dbls questioning there.

[cherdanno]

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 08:37 PM, said:

jdonn, on Aug 2 2010, 04:02 PM, said:

Or they psych, as people often do over 2♣ opening bids, and just steal your 5-5 fit?

Josh if your partner opened 2♣ and then doubled 2♠ and you happened to be looking at ♠Jxxxx, would you be confident enough to pass thinking he had a penalty x?

Yes.

[bid_em_up]

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 09:37 PM, said:

jdonn, on Aug 2 2010, 04:02 PM, said:

Or they psych, as people often do over 2♣ opening bids, and just steal your 5-5 fit?

Josh if your partner opened 2♣ and then doubled 2♠ and you happened to be looking at ♠Jxxxx, would you be confident enough to pass thinking he had a penalty x?

I wouldn't care, he has a 2♣ opener, and I have 5 trumps. This is likely our best spot.

[jdonn]

cherdanno, on Aug 3 2010, 06:54 AM, said:

Phil, on Aug 2 2010, 08:37 PM, said:

jdonn, on Aug 2 2010, 04:02 PM, said:

Or they psych, as people often do over 2♣ opening bids, and just steal your 5-5 fit?

Josh if your partner opened 2♣ and then doubled 2♠ and you happened to be looking at ♠Jxxxx, would you be confident enough to pass thinking he had a penalty x?

Yes.

typ