[rwbarton]

To those who make a "support double": would you also double on a weak NT with three hearts (aside from perhaps a pure 2335 hand)? What about a minimum 3316 shape?

[the hog]

As Aguahombre says, if you play GB, then this is a 2NT bid. If you don't i would certainly pass. 3C is a gross overbid.

[the hog]

Double post.

[han]

I see that several respectable posters pass. That's a joke to me. How can you pass, our hand has become really big and we have shortness in their suit? I don't think that partner is the one that should be reopening with 3-4-3-3 or 3-5-3-2 shapes, unless he has a good hand. We're even NV at matchpoints, I don't want to sell out to 2S with this hand!

I would double, whether it is a takeout double (which is what I play) or a support double. I agree that this double is far from mandatory, we should never double on a balanced 12-14 for example. But instead of playing that this double shows strength, I think that we should also double with good shape, and this shape is perfect.

There is something to be said for 3C, the hearts are weak and the clubs are decent. But this is matchpoints and we need to take a lot of tricks in clubs to beat 3H making. And we will often get to clubs even if we double. At IMPs I would be worried about being in the wrong game when partner bids 3NT over our 3C.

By the way, in response to our (takeout) double I play that 2NT is scrambling, and a direct 3H is stronger than 2NT followed by 3H.

[han]

rwbarton, on 2012-August-18, 23:30, said:

To those who make a "support double": would you also double on a weak NT with three hearts (aside from perhaps a pure 2335 hand)? What about a minimum 3316 shape?

I just answered to the former, and I would also not double with minimum 3-3-1-6 shapes.

I don't like support here anyway, I would want to describe it as takeout and I'd also double with xx Ax AQxx KQJxx.

[lalldonn]

han, on 2012-August-20, 05:23, said:

I see that several respectable posters pass. That's a joke to me. How can you pass, our hand has become really big and we have shortness in their suit? I don't think that partner is the one that should be reopening with 3-4-3-3 or 3-5-3-2 shapes, unless he has a good hand. We're even NV at matchpoints, I don't want to sell out to 2S with this hand!

The lesson should be to play G/B or something. It's not to make a huge overbid just because you want to be doing something. How do you ever expect partner to know what to do if double is either strength or shape?

[fromageGB]

The trouble with BadNT (when is it ever good?) is that it does not convey your shape, the fact that you are able to compete in hearts. For me Quantumcat hit the nail on the head when she analysed partner's possibilities when the opponent bids over whatever you say. BadNT doesn't do it, but Support Double (if you play it) does.

[phil_20686]

han, on 2012-August-20, 05:23, said:

I see that several respectable posters pass. That's a joke to me. How can you pass, our hand has become really big and we have shortness in their suit?

I also think this, but I think this is mostly European players who play this way, we are very shape orientated on our t/o doubles, and less HCP orientated, compared to americans, who always seem to think:

Quote

How do you ever expect partner to know what to do if double is either strength or shape?

I mean I know lots of players who would pass 1!s with Kx AJxx xx AQxxx, as having an unsuitable shape for a t/o double, and I understand that is basically an unknown attitude in the US.