From: boyiny@polya.mit.edu (Professor Who?)
Subject: Re: What is so terrible about doubling offshape?
Summary: Double _does_ have much to gain, I am afraid.
Keywords: double
Organization: Ayatollah's Correct Bidding Lessons
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 01:56:58 GMT

 Steve Altus (>) in response to Ben Wing (>>) in the quotes below.  At
least people know that I am good friends with Steve so my comments would
not be construed as inflammatory....  The subject is doubling offshape over
1H to the right holding a 4-4-1-4 19-count.

>>I agree with Bo-Yin here ...  the attitude "don't do X because if
>>situation Y happens, you'll be screwed" ... is a hold-over from the
>>'30's, where no-trump openings denied a small doubleton ... . etc.

I hate to point this out (as Ben is agreeing with _me_) but many people who
play systems that allow them to do so safely still avoid the notrump opening
with an unstopped doubleton!  Among others, Roth-style players still avoid
opening flawed 1NT's when there is a good rebid.  Also Acol players.

[As analysis in bidding theory, the reasons that the modern style leads to
opening no-trumps more and more are: (a) the fact that most people have
spent relatively more time going over no-trump structures and feel more
comfortable, even though opening 1NT is not good for your constructive
auctions in general; (b) modern shape-oriented bidding have taken away most
of the elbow room needed to cover these hands under a separate opening bid,
with the result that you can't open them with anything other than 1NT and
hope to survive!  Me, when I can I avoid opening "strong" 1NT's.]

>>... experts who don't hold this attitude, ...  Most ... come from other
>>countries, which may explain why Bob doesn't acknowledge their existence.
>this isn't quite the same ... [systemic risk-taking] occasionally gets
>you into trouble  just doesn't happen that often...  

I agree-- I should know of all the people here.  [Edgar Kaplan: well, I
know a certain young gentleman (looking at me, sitting right next to his
commentator's stand) who would not let lack of offense, lack of defense,
lack of high card points, lack of spots, or lack of a suit deter him from
overcalling (laughter from Jeff Ferro and the rest of youngish contingent
below).]  The risk is not all that high especially if your opponents have
not tailored their methods to deal with it.

>... double intending to show a strong balanced hand when
>you have a singleton in a suit which partner would have to bid on the
>2-level (hint: which suit is (s)he statistically most likely to bid?) AND
>you have no safety in 2NT (which you would have to bid over this expected
>response)... rates to gain you very little and lose you much.

Here is where we differ.  First, please note that partner will likely bid
_ANY_ 4 card spade suit, no matter how many diamonds s/he holds.   With 9
spades, 4 hearts (at least), 9 clubs and 12 diamonds out there, partner
rate 10/3 spades-- if he has four you just won your shot, and that is at
least 40%.  Add that to the probability that partner had 4-4 in the minors,
or even five clubs, that is another 20% or so ...  If partner holds _SIX_
diamonds you would end in 3D after a 1NT overcall anyhow.... to lose
partner must have exactly five diamonds, no more than 3 spades, and not
enough strength to make 2NT.  I fancy my chances.

> point here is that doubling on this hand, unless you have agreements
>which prescribe double here, is not likely to gain you much vs.
>overcalling 1NT, and is very likely to get you to a hopeless spot. ...

See previous paragraph for reasons why doubling can gain...  As people may
have seen I intend to take an even bigger position and PASS the 2D response
should one come around.

I will do a full BOREL simulation when I get back to Taiwan.....

Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge