From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Subject: Re: Over Strong NT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:38:25 GMT

In article <1992Oct4.010356.8569@ramon.bgu.ac.il> avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira) writes:
>paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson) writes:
>: In article <1992Sep27.000236.28111@ramon.bgu.ac.il> avir@chen.bgu.ac.il (Avi Roy Shapira) writes:
>....
>                                                                    forbid
>: >partner to pull out the double with a yarborough. Partner should pull only
>: >when he/she sees prospects for a vulnerable game, so any call he makes is
>: >at least invitational -
>:
>: This is not a good treatment. Partner should be able to pull your double with
>: UNBALANCED poor hands. Otherwise, you either can't double enough or the
>: opponents will make their doubled contracts too often.
>:

>I see that I have to explain my views on this more fully.  lets assume that
>you have the following hand: xxx,xxxxx,xxxx,x. This is an unbalanced poor hand.
>Now, if partner had opend 1N, clearly you should take it out to 2H (by bidding
>2D Jacoby for instance). The reason is simple. You will make on the average 2
>more tricks playing in hearts than in NT.

Oh, I understand your reasoning I just feel that it is completely wrong.
Playing your way you cannot double on balanced hands, you can only double
on hands with huge trick taking potential. A balanced 18 count is NOT
sufficient.

So, if partner can have a balanced hand I STILL average 2 tricks more
playing in Hearts than in NT. In other words, vs 1NT * making we take 8
tricks with hearts as trumps, vs 1NT * down 2 we make 4 hearts. It is wrong
only if we can put 1NT down exactly 1 and not make a game.

Also, please note, defending 1NT in this situation is one of the hardest
things to do as the defenders have little information on each others hand.
It is rare that even the best of defenders will take the maximum result
against a 1NT contract. There is therefore a practical advantage to being
in 2H even if, theoretically, both 1NT and 2H go down 1.

>
>But in 4th seat, after 1NT x pass, you should sit for the double. Why?
>
>First, if partner has a minimum double, 2H will go for 300 - 1100, whereas
>1NTx scores 180.  Even 1 OT will not be that expensive. 280 nv, 380 vul.
>2 OT's, you say? then they have game. 580 is less than 600.

There are many hands where 1NT and 2H both make. Also, opponents will often
be unable to double 2H even when it goes down. Third, 2H doubled down 1 is
only 100 when non vulnerable.

In most of the doom and gloom scenarios, you've already lost the board by
aggresively doubling 1NT anyway.

>
>Second, partner does not necessarily have a balanced hand. For all you
>know, partner might have say xxx, x, Ax, AKQJxx - a perfectly sound double
>of 1NT -  by bidding you will convert +200 to -500. (partner will
>surely bid 3C, and 7 tricks are the limit).

Personally, I rarely hold these hands. When I do, opponents seem to manage to
find their cold 4S contracts.

>
>In short, by taking out the double, you are in a no win situation. By sitting,
>you minimize the losses, and may even score. Remember, the weaker you are,
>the stronger parnter rates to be.  Declarer's strength is known: 15-17 HCP.
>Partner could have 9 - 25.  Decalrer has a balanced hand. Partner could
>have anything. Remember, that the doubler is on lead. He does not need
>stoppers. He can roll his suit.
>
>Therefore, the only reason to take the double out is that doubler's
>partner has an offensive hand, and thinks that game or slam for our side is
>possible.
>
>Avi

All of the above means that you can only double 1NT on a very restricted set
of hands (either grossly powerful or single suited). On many of these, it
will turn out to have been better not to double and just bid your own suit
(finding your own best contract is still often the best result).

I believe that it is superior to enlarge the class of hands where one can
make a double by making the double somewhat cooperative. Yes, this loses on
the hands where the doubler has 1NT down in his own hand. However, it gains
on most others. The requirement that partner of the doubler has to be
unbalanced greatly reduces the occassions where 1NT is going down but the
partner of the double pulls it.

Incidentally, I certainly hope that you are alerting your doubles as there
are all sorts of non standard inferences in your treatment.