Do you Double?
by Paul Barden
On each of the following dozen hands a case could be made
for doubling, sometimes for take-out and sometimes for penalty.
Decide on your action on each hand and then compare with Paul
Barden's perceptive analysis. IMP scoring throughout.
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
P |
1 |
P |
2 |
P |
2 |
? |
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
P |
1 |
P |
2 |
P |
2 |
P |
3* |
P |
3 |
P |
4 |
P |
4NT |
P |
5§ |
P |
6 |
? |
*4th suit forcing §0 or 3 of 5 aces |
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
2NT |
3* |
? |
*Stayman |
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
4 |
P |
P |
? |
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1 |
2 |
P* |
P |
? |
*Playing negative doubles
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1 |
2 |
3* |
3 |
4 |
4 |
? |
*Sound raise to 3
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1 |
1 |
3* |
4§ |
4 |
4 |
P |
P |
? |
*Pre-emptive raise §s and
s
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
P |
P |
1 |
4 |
P |
5 |
5 |
? |
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1 |
2 |
X* |
3 |
X§ |
P |
3 |
P |
3 |
P |
3 |
P |
3NT |
P |
4 |
P |
P |
? |
*Negative § Responsive
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1 |
2* |
3NT |
P |
P |
? |
*Intermediate
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1NT |
P |
2* |
P |
2 |
P |
2NT |
P |
3NT |
? |
*Stayman
|
|
|
|
|
West |
North |
East |
South |
1 |
P |
1 |
P |
2 |
P |
3 |
P |
3 |
P |
4 |
? |
|
These hands, all from actual play in serious events,
illustrate some of my pet theories about doubling - how to gain
big numbers and how to avoid conceding them.
Problem (1) is a typical example of a fatuous double. What
do you stand to gain by doubling? First, there is no particular
reason to expect partner to be on lead. Second, you don't know
whether you want a heart lead or a diamond lead. Third, if you
double, left hand opponent redoubles and you concede 1240 for
2XX+3.
Problem (2) is the same hand several rounds later. There's
still no reason to double. If you pass you score +100 for two
undertricks. If you double you score +100 for one undertrick.
Admittedly 6 is unlikely to be
makeable even with the heart position exposed, but what about
6NT? The black suits appear to be sitting rather well for
them.
Problem (3) is less clearcut. But partner will still be
cross if you deflect him from a winning spade lead. And in
practice double concedes 840.
Problem (4) is about the penalty aspect of take-out doubles.
You'd love to make a take-out double here and have partner
choose a major, but do you seriously expect him to do that?
Most of the time he will pass and you will score -710. If you
must act, take a punt at 4. At the
table, this was worth +620.
Problem (5) is the other side of the same coin. A take-out
double on this hand scores +1100. But what if you double,
partner bids 2 and you correct to
2. Does this show extra values? I
don't think it should, but some eminent theorists disagree.
Discuss it with your partner.
On problem (6), your first action was an overbid. But it's
too late to worry about that now; you're in a forcing position
and you have to help your partner. The right action is double,
since you don't want him to bid 5 and
have no reason to expect 4 to make. In
this sort of auction, double doesn't promise trump tricks, it
just offers an opinion about the best available score. At the
table, declarer went 1100 off in 4
when he took what he thought was a marked finesse in spades in
an attempt to make his contract. He would have done better of
course to play safe for one off.
Problem (7) looks like a juicy penalty double. But wait a
minute. How many hearts do you expect to stand up? One at best.
How many spades do you think partner has? Probably none. How
many minor suit tricks do you expect partner to take? Probably
none since they have diamonds to run. How many trumps to you
expect to make? Possibly two, since declarer may have control
problems on heart leads, but not more. So the best result you
can reasonably expect from 4 doubled
is one off. On the other hand, 5 can
hardly be worse than one off and may make if partner has K or a minor suit ace. In my opinion 5 is the correct call.
Problem (8) must be one of the best penalty doubles ever
seen. But what sort of hand has RHO got? Obviously it's highly
distributional, and presumably it's two-suited, since there
aren't enough heart honours out for a strong heart
single-suiter. If RHO had diamonds he'd have bid them, so he
must have spades. If we double he may view to remove.
Meanwhile, LHO has very short hearts, and probably not many
clubs, so he's likely to have good spade support. It looks to
me as if we should be passing and aiming to beat 5 in 100s. In practice, 5X cost 1700. But grand slam can be made in spades.
Problem (9) also looks like a promising trump stack, and
this one I like. Opponents have investigated the other suits,
so there's no good reason to assume they've got a much better
spot. Double would have netted +1100.
Problem (10) looks like a promising double of 3NT, with the
king of diamonds apparently well placed and the heart suit
about to run. But of course there's no reason why they should
need the diamonds to make nine tricks, and there's no reason to
expect partner to have any values. Double will ensure a heart
lead, but partner is hardly likely to have an attractive
alternative in any case. When the hand was played, this hand
doubled, then put in the nine on the heart lead to keep
communications open. With the diamond ace in fact in declarer's
hand, all 13 tricks were made with the aid of a squeeze.
-1550.
Problem (11) is much more the sort of thing. Neither
opponent can have much to spare, both majors seem to be sitting
badly, and we have a promising club lead. Unfortunately partner
had a singleton club, but the major suit positions were still
enough to beat the contract; +100 for the double.
I have no recommendation to make on problem (12), apart from
advising you to listen to the auction. What you know already is
that declarer has 5 hearts (not 6, since he offered dummy the
option of playing in spades) and dummy has 3. So partner has 4
hearts. Also, declarer has 3 spades and dummy has 4, so partner
has a singleton. Any diamond finesses are failing. So what you
need to know is whether declarer has spare values. If not, you
should certainly double. You should be making up your mind
about this from the moment RHO bids 1,
so you are alive to every inference from declarer's tempo and
your final pass or double is made in tempo. At the table
declarer went three off undoubled, and couldn't have avoided
two off at least.