At the two level.

June 17, 2009 at 9:38 am 15 comments

I was given this auction recently:

2H….2NT….X….XX

2H is a weak 2
2NT is natural, around 15-18
X is penalty

The question is, what is redouble?

Does it have a systemic meaning for you? Or an obvious logical one?

Advertisements

Entry filed under: bidding.

An unusual bidding situation continued. At the two level continued.

15 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Ron Lel  |  July 10, 2009 at 6:13 pm

    “1NT……..Dble…..Pass….Pass
    Redble…Pass…..Pass

    Almost nobody ever sticks it. It is offered as a sporting gesture and routinely declined!”

    Hmm. Maybe I should return home to Australia.

    Reply
  • 2. Jonathan Mestel  |  June 18, 2009 at 4:40 pm

    For me it shows two places to play. Of course we may not exactly relish either of them…

    Reply
  • 3. andrew webb  |  June 18, 2009 at 9:58 am

    It’s nothing without an agreement; please guess! It’s to play, because you have the best/most information. It’s for rescue, because that’s the best utility.

    -1600 from Rubin/Granovetter in the (just completed) USA2 trials suggests there is no strong consensus on which principle should obtain.

    Reply
  • 4. Nigel Kearney  |  June 17, 2009 at 3:50 pm

    I’ve never discussed it.

    I’d suggest it should be the same as 1H-1NT-X-XX, i.e. your agreed escape mechanism one level higher.

    Having spent about 5 minutes thinking about it, I can now confirm that, yes, it is obvious.

    Reply
  • 5. Richard  |  June 17, 2009 at 3:43 pm

    I don’t recall ever discussing this exact sequence with any of my partners. When playing a weak no-trump, I use the Moscow run-outs (compulsory redouble etc), and in a sequence similar to the example at the one-level, we play the same way (1H – 1NT – X – XX transfers to 2C for pass or correct to 2D). It would make sense to me to play this way at the two-level also (2H – 2NT – X – XX transfers to 3C for pass or correct to 3D). But I better ask my partner if he agrees!

    Reply
  • 6. phil markey  |  June 17, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    in my system redouble is to play unless its plainly not to play so its to play in this sequence albeit that it looks unlikely – i think playing a natural barrage system adds weight to its value in being to play – i recall c chua quoting p hogan on the topic once – “thats not a knife – this is a knife”

    for most people its a ridiculous sequence unless they have a clear agreement rather than system on the run – after scoring up some minus post-code type score the bitching will begin with “X means Y and A means B and over P Q means K so redouble cant possibly mean redouble it obviously means D” – or maybe my personal favourite – “when i play with F J means G so it shows L”

    Reply
  • 7. jill magee  |  June 17, 2009 at 1:52 pm

    – xx is a 5+ card minor–> pd bids 3C correctable.

    -pass forces a redouble which would, in a legitimate penalty situation , initiate bidding of 4 card suits up the line

    -3C is stayman
    -3H is tfr to spades;
    -3S and 3NT tfrs to C and D,
    but unlikely in this situation, unless unusual shape,
    as can XX to stop at the 3 level in a minor

    Reply
  • 8. Chris Mulley  |  June 17, 2009 at 11:23 am

    Paul and I play this as our usual running mechanism from 1NTx; Redouble shows single-suited (any), with 3C and above being “DONT”-style.

    I think that the “obvious logical meaning” is your running mechanism from 1NTx … at least where XX is not to play in that mechanism – I keep forgetting that I am a weak NT deviant. Even if 1NTxx is to play, I still think that is the logical meaning of the bid in the auction.

    That “logical meaning” is premised on me having a sensible way of getting out of 1NTx which involves showing both 2-suiters and single-suiters. If I do not have such a mechanism, then I think it makes sense to play redouble here as the option that you couldn’t show (so, if suit would be natural and single-suited, XX shows any two-suited).

    Reply
    • 9. phil markey  |  June 18, 2009 at 11:40 am

      “That “logical meaning” is premised on me having a sensible way of getting out of 1NTx which involves showing both 2-suiters and single-suiters. If I do not have such a mechanism, then I think it makes sense to play redouble here as the option that you couldn’t show (so, if suit would be natural and single-suited, XX shows any two-suited).”

      i am a devout weak 1nt opener and this statement upsets me

      a weak 1nt opening is an attacking manouevre – when they counter attack there is little value in finding the best retreat – if your going to get hurt your commonly getting hurt wherever you land – dont be a pussy and put your hand in the air and XX saying “i think we are getting hurt” – its like splashing blood in shark infested waters or aussie rules footballers holding the ball in the air after taking a mark to signify that they think they are under pressure and need to slow the game down

      good players who dont play a weak 1nt like to hit it because it upsets them that you can open rubbish hands this way – they stretch vigourously to double – i routinely XX as quickly as i can with ok looking 7-9 counts and i love my results doing that

      using redouble as the “bigger knife” is the only way a weak 1nt pair should go

      Reply
      • 10. Ben Thompson  |  June 18, 2009 at 2:32 pm

        If only bridge had an “octuple”….

        Reply
      • 11. Richard  |  June 18, 2009 at 2:40 pm

        “using redouble as the “bigger knife” is the only way a weak 1nt pair should go”

        Using redouble as the start of an escape manouver implies using pass to get a redouble from opener/overcaller, which you can then pass if you want to play 1NT redoubled (or 2NT redoubled in this case). Mission accomplished.

        Reply
      • 12. cathychua  |  June 18, 2009 at 4:40 pm

        I must say, I wouldn’t dream of not having a couple of ways to penalise the opponents after a 1NT opening, weak or otherwise. My partnerships typically play that redouble is serious, ie forcing to 2NT so that everything can be penalised along the way if appropriate, while pass will create redouble situations that are for a laugh: ie it might make, it might go down. Curiously, even when this sequence is so described:

        1NT……..Dble…..Pass….Pass
        Redble…Pass…..Pass

        Almost nobody ever sticks it. It is offered as a sporting gesture and routinely declined!

        Reply
      • 13. phil markey  |  June 18, 2009 at 6:02 pm

        “Using redouble as the start of an escape manouver implies using pass to get a redouble from opener/overcaller, which you can then pass if you want to play 1NT redoubled (or 2NT redoubled in this case). Mission accomplished.”

        i dont like your manouevre – i’m not sure if i like mine – cant find the 2 volume oxford not so concise – but i rally against americans refusing to put 3 vowels together

        i do both – so pass says “run if you have a surprising suit otherwise redouble and i’ll either pass or bid a suit unnaturally”

        a couple of times when i have explained this agreement my opponents get cross that i have 2 ways of playing 1ntXX which arent distinguished in some way – its critical though that the immediate redouble is business for it to have an effective attacking purpose

        Reply
      • 14. Chris Mulley  |  June 19, 2009 at 5:45 pm

        What I meant was that in this auction, where XX to play has little merit, you should use it to show 2-suiters. I was not implying that people who play a weak NT should not play XX for penalties (although we don’t).

        Reply
  • 15. david appleton  |  June 17, 2009 at 10:40 am

    Start of a bail mechanism. Whenever they have both contributed to an auction, bail mechanisms of NT apply (not so for us when only one has).

    daa

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


June 2009
M T W T F S S
« May   Jul »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


%d bloggers like this: