[phil_20686]

So I am interested in what people play in these three situations.

If you think the vul matters, please indicate it in the comments.

[gwnn]

In all cases it shows a (very) maximum preempt, intending to make 4H. I guess that is an action x but I don't know these terms. Of course it depends on your style, for example many people never have opening strength when they open 4H, for them maybe x could mean 'I have a very pure 4H bid pard, I want to bid 5H,' is that an action x?

[helene_t]

gwnn, on 2012-November-12, 09:42, said:

'I have a very pure 4H bid pard, I want to bid 5H,' is that an action x?

I am not sure about the terminology, but such a double doesn't make sense in the passout seat. Partner couldn't double so he won't be able to pass our double unless it promises at leat one unexpected defensive trick.

I voted for action in all three polls, by which I mean that I have more offense than expected but also more defense.

[ArtK78]

I found this description of an "action double" on BridgeHands:



Action, Optional, Cooperative, (Alertable)

By Either Partner

Allows partner to either penalize or compete further. Note: Some question the wisdom of this convention.

Example: 1C - (1S) - 2C - (2S); P - (P) - X


I made a couple of grammatical edits to the presentation from BridgeHands.

It seems to me that the preempt followed by a double in pass out seat would come under the heading of an "action double," but I don't know that the terminology is all that important. The important thing is that the "preemptor" is announcing that his hand is strong for his action and he is unwilling to sell out to the opponents undoubled. Partner is to use his or her judgment to determine whether to sit for the double or to bid on.

[phil_20686]

SO I thought an action double by a preemptor means "I am seriously considering bidding 5H, just giving you the option to pass if you think you can beat 4S". Like for those hands where you open with 8 solid green vs red they bid 4S. It obviously always shows extra offense, I wouldn't understand it to necessarily have any extra defence though. Maybe that is not correct.

[ArtK78]

phil_20686, on 2012-November-12, 10:47, said:

SO I thought an action double by a preemptor means "I am seriously considering bidding 5H, just giving you the option to pass if you think you can beat 4S". Like for those hands where you open with 8 solid green vs red they bid 4S. It obviously always shows extra offense, I wouldn't understand it to necessarily have any extra defence though. Maybe that is not correct.

I don't think you are correct.

It should show a hand that bid to make, and does have some defense.

If partner thought he could beat the opponents with no contribution from you other than your preempt (even if your preempt is AKQJT98) he could have doubled (assuming that you are in pass out seat). So extra offense is not the issue.

Suppose you held:

x
AKQJT987
Axx
A

and the auction went (1♣) - P - (1♠)

It would not be unreasonable to bid 4♥ on these cards.

If the auction continued (4♠) - P - (P) back to you, you would double. You have 2 or 3 defensive tricks (4 on a really good day), and you want partner to make the decision.

But with a 9 card heart suit and no outside aces, you would not double.

[Phil]

I've never heard of this double being called an 'action' double but if you mean, "I have a max preempt and I'm inviting you to pass / bid", then fine.

[SteveMoe]

What Phil says.
"Action Doubles" seem to have many meanings and are context dependent - not sure there is one definition we'd all agree to.

[WellSpyder]

phil_20686, on 2012-November-12, 10:47, said:

SO I thought an action double by a preemptor means "I am seriously considering bidding 5H, just giving you the option to pass if you think you can beat 4S". Like for those hands where you open with 8 solid green vs red they bid 4S. It obviously always shows extra offense, I wouldn't understand it to necessarily have any extra defence though. Maybe that is not correct.

That is pretty much my understanding of an "action double", too - but then I don't play them! My default understanding would be much more in line with what others assume is an "action double", ie I have a (very) maximum pre-empt including some defence and don't want to defend undoubled, but would be happy for you to pass or bid on as you see fit.

[akhare]

I do think that agreements will be shaped by vulnerability and other conventions(like NAYMATS) as well.

[manudude03]

I'm not too sure about the terminology myself, but I would play all 3 of them as "I was bidding 4H to make". Voted action.

[mikeh]

I joined what seems to be the majority in voting 'action' for all 3, but then read that different people understand 'action' differently.

I'm of the school where the double means I have an unexpectedly strong hand with some defence, rather than: I'd like to save unless you'd like to defend.

I can see where both schools have merit, but I don't think one can double with both hand types and hope to land on one's feet very often. I guess my preference is based on how I've long played it and seen it played by those I respect, but having said that, all 3 sequences are rare in my experience so my vaguely recalled sample base is very small.

[dake50]

"I have the Ace in my preempt suit, plus something else, so I'm not worthless in defense"
But, are you sure to beat them?

[JLOGIC]

My general rule is that X just says I had a good hand and was bidding to make unless that is impossible. So, a 3rd seat 4M or a 4M overcall followed by X is just a good hand (aka, I'm showing some defense). I might do those with a 16 count or whatever.

I would never open 4M in first or second seat with a high HCP or high defense hand. Since that hand type is impossible, I play it as "I want to bid 5M" meaning I have a lot of extra offense.

[cherdano]

What Justin said.

[the hog]

Interesting. I would play the first x as saying "partner i have a void somewhere. Our best chance of setting this contract is for you to give me a ruff".

[mike777]

great post..it reminds of a post/thread Justin made a while ago where I think he said...doubles are for penalty or for takeout


hopefully a forum poster can find and repost his thoughts on this subject...

[PhilKing]

I like all three to show a void somewhere (not in trumps ) plus a good two-way hand. Partner is free to pull with no entry, but the potential gain is huge.

If we are bidding in front of partner I like the "I want to bid 5" treatment, but once he has not doubled, that seems less useful.

[phil_20686]

JLOGIC, on 2012-November-14, 16:53, said:

My general rule is that X just says I had a good hand and was bidding to make unless that is impossible. So, a 3rd seat 4M or a 4M overcall followed by X is just a good hand (aka, I'm showing some defense). I might do those with a 16 count or whatever.

I would never open 4M in first or second seat with a high HCP or high defense hand. Since that hand type is impossible, I play it as "I want to bid 5M" meaning I have a lot of extra offense.

So I thought this would be std, of being a "good hand" only in the third case, and being "extra offense/wants to bid 5M" in the first two.

The hand that inspired this thread was

---

Dble now? or not?

[jogs]

phil_20686, on 2012-November-15, 06:55, said:

So I thought this would be std, of being a "good hand" only in the third case, and being "extra offense/wants to bid 5M" in the first two.

The hand that inspired this thread was

---

Dble now? or not?

Pass. Do not want partner to pull to 5♥.
Plan to lead ♠A. Hope to find correct
continuation after seeing dummy.