[gthcd]

In my partnerships, double of a 4♥ (or a 4♠) preempt is for penalties. It's in the system notes.

Little discussed though is :
1. after 4♥ X is partner allowed to remove the X and bid 4♠ ?
2. what does he need to do that ?

At this point I think the answers might be 1. Yes, 2. At least 5 spades, shortage in hearts, values (with some prospects of slam ?)

[SteveMoe]

Playing aggressive doubles, South should Double. Above 3♥, doubles are more cards than a clear commitment to the other major (at least 3 cards in all unbids and sound values).

With 6 HCP and 4 card ♠ opposite partner's double might or might not make game. North should reason that if partner has sound values outside ♥, EW are in trouble. North should also reason that partner could be under pressure with values and no clear direction. Taking 5 or 6 tricks on defense might be easier than 10 on offense. North could PASS. I believe North's decision is close to a coin flip. What tips it to pass and defend for me is that both NS have shortness in the SAME suit (North knows this, not South). That suggests declaring will be more difficult than defending.

[aawk]

If a bidding leads to a wrong contract only look for the first bid which was wrong all other bids which followed at no relevant any more.

So was the double on 4h correct. If yes then you will end up in 4♠ doubled if no then you will set 4♥.

The only question remains what the arguments are to double 4h.

Is it a take out double because the will make 4♥, is it a info double to get to game or is it to show you got strong hand and let partner decide to try to set 4♥ or play any other contract ?

For a take out double the hand should as least hold 4-4-3 in the suits outside ♥ so can't be the right action.

For a info double what does partner needs for 4s to be the right contract keeping in mind he/she already passed. If you play 2♠ as weak with a 6 card partners holdings in ♠ could be enough. If 2♠ could be weak with a 5(+) card 4♠ is not likely the best contract.

For a double showing strength the question is if partners should bid 4♠ or is pass to set 4♥ the better option.

I would pass 4♥ because the hand is not suited for (any sort of) double in the given bid situation.

[mlbridge]

Definitely will not double if it is for takeout. Odds of spades breaking are slim.

If we play double of 4h is for penalty, then it depends on when in the round. If early in the round, I probably just pass. Hate to have someone make 4Hx on me early in the round. If late in the round and I need a top board, then I double and hope to find pard with a K that will hold up. I will lead out my aces. If I need an average board, I will just pass.

If imps, just pass.

[miamijd]

All the bids look just fine to me.

There's a reason why the top pros preempt more and higher than the average player. Preempts cause BIG problems, even for world champion class players. This is one of those deals.

It's easy to criticize Xs like this when they don't work. The problem is that pass is even riskier. If you are conservative over preempts and pass hands like this, you will get taken the cleaners day in and day out by high-level openings.

It's also easy to criticize North's bid given all the hands, but I think he has a clear 4S call. You can't pass with a stiff h and let the opponents play at the 4-level with a presumed 11 card fit. Let's give South a more typical double by giving him West's Queen of spades and King of diamonds in exchange for a low heart and the Ace of diamonds. Now East makes 4HX easily.

What is North supposed to do after the X? 4S was normal; if he's fixed, he's fixed.

And what is South supposed to do? 5 of a minor could be much worse.

Sometimes @#$% happens. You have to make the bids most likely to land you on your feet, and I think both N and S did.


Cheers,
Mike

[Nabooba]

Some very odd comments in this thread. Firstly, Nethken, the x is for takeout. Most experts play X through 4S as takeout. 4S is obvious.
Secondly, I would never pull the x of 4S. Who says C is better.
Thirdly I don't like the x opposite a passed hand. Simply pass.

[eagles123]

 nige1, on 2017-May-18, 11:53, said:

Agree with diana_eva although on a good day, North might pass South's double.
South hand posted to BridgeWinners as a Bidding Poll






.

Thanks for posting this poll, I have to say I'm surprised at the result - maybe I had an unconcious bias in my original answer.

[Winstonm]

 miamijd, on 2017-May-19, 20:45, said:

All the bids look just fine to me.

There's a reason why the top pros preempt more and higher than the average player. Preempts cause BIG problems, even for world champion class players. This is one of those deals.

It's easy to criticize Xs like this when they don't work. The problem is that pass is even riskier. If you are conservative over preempts and pass hands like this, you will get taken the cleaners day in and day out by high-level openings.

It's also easy to criticize North's bid given all the hands, but I think he has a clear 4S call. You can't pass with a stiff h and let the opponents play at the 4-level with a presumed 11 card fit. Let's give South a more typical double by giving him West's Queen of spades and King of diamonds in exchange for a low heart and the Ace of diamonds. Now East makes 4HX easily.

What is North supposed to do after the X? 4S was normal; if he's fixed, he's fixed.

And what is South supposed to do? 5 of a minor could be much worse.

Sometimes @#$% happens. You have to make the bids most likely to land you on your feet, and I think both N and S did.


Cheers,
Mike

This sounds like an argument that could be made favoring more penalty-orientated doubles of preemptive bids. As the bridge clock spins, styles come and go. Perhaps it is spinning toward a time when this convention may make a return.

[Nabooba]

Make a comeback? Hardly! Opener opens 4H. You hold Axxx void AKxxx KJxx
What will you do? Double for penalties? Do you think you can beat 4H? Maybe, maybe not. This could be a double game swing. Even worse is the so called "optional double", often called the "pass the blame double."

[Winstonm]

 Nabooba, on 2017-May-20, 19:07, said:

Make a comeback? Hardly! Opener opens 4H. You hold Axxx void AKxxx KJxx
What will you do? Double for penalties? Do you think you can beat 4H? Maybe, maybe not. This could be a double game swing. Even worse is the so called "optional double", often called the "pass the blame double."

With that hand you would bid 4S, takeout. No problem. The problem hand you probably meant to use was the natural 4S overcall hand. That is a problem. Fishbein is like any other convention - great when you hold the perfect hand for it - not so useful when you don't.

[Nabooba]

 Winstonm, on 2017-May-20, 20:12, said:

With that hand you would bid 4S, takeout. No problem. The problem hand you probably meant to use was the natural 4S overcall hand. That is a problem. Fishbein is like any other convention - great when you hold the perfect hand for it - not so useful when you don't.

"With that hand you would bid 4S, takeout."
No I would not and neither would any good player.

[cherdano]

 helene_t, on 2017-May-19, 02:16, said:

Yes, maybe I should have posted it as a one-hand problem. I chose to present the whole deal because my partner (who is a very good player) thought that my initial double was ok but that I should have bid 5♣ after 4♠ was doubled.

IMO the only crazy thing that happened at the table is this suggestion. Your partner may be a good player; but some good players aren't good at thinking about a bidding problem from partner's perspective in the post mortem.

[Winstonm]

 Nabooba, on 2017-May-20, 22:51, said:

"With that hand you would bid 4S, takeout."
No I would not and neither would any good player.

Yes, you would, playing Fishbein.

Quote

.... the original Fishbein convention, the concept of the unique Takeout Double is for the player immediately following the Preemptive opening to bid the cheapest, next available suit. An immediate Double is a Penalty Double.

Playing Fishbein (which I don't endorse), you would bid 4S over a 4H opening as a takeout - perfect hand would be 4144.

I'm sorry you want to argue about this unrelated point. The issue is that bridge changes. In its earliest days, opening bids were quite loose and made with hands more like today's hands - but consstructive bidding slowly replaced that idea. Later on, too rigid of opening bids created an opening for preemptive bids to mess with opponents' construction. It wasn't until the 60s that Howard Schenken introduced weak 2-bids in the Schenken Club system, a result of losses to the Blue Team's better methods in international play.

Anyway, all I can tell you is that with the turn of the clock back towards weaker and more destructive preempts, it is only natural that pressure will build to use punishing doubles more frequently.

[P_Marlowe]

happens, they got you.