[kolay]

How do you think about support double? Do you think it is a weapon in competitive bidding?

I was arguing with my pard with this progress.


Pard Right Me Left
1C PASS 1H 2S
DBL??


My pard think if there is a preempt bidding, double shows powers, not fit. So, she want play support through 2H. But I think it's still a support double. How do you think about this?

[whereagles]

Support doubles are playable up to the point where you can still play responder's major at the 2-level. So in your case double should not be support (you can't play 2♥). Of course, some play supp dbl up to any level, but I don't think that's a good strategy.

That being said, I prefer to support with 3 cards if the hand is unbalanced and use double as general take out...

[helene_t]

Against a non-jump intervention, support doubles are straight-forward as resonder can rebid his suit at the two-level if he wants to sign off. This makes it easy to define responder's other actions:
1♣-(Pass)-1♠-(2♥)
dbl-(Pass)-?
2♠,3♣: sign-off (you could agree to play 3♣ as invitational)
2NT,3♦: invitational (3♦ must be forcing if you don't play Walsh)

If you play support double here, it is less straight-forward because you probably don't want to play at the three-level in a 4-3 fit. So what does 2NT from responder mean? Natural NF, artificial sign-off or scramble?

Another issue is that responder may consider passing, but in that case the dbl should say something about opener's defensive values.

Maybe (just a thought) it's better to play non-mandatory support doubles here: the double shows 3-card support and either 18-19 balanced or shortness in spades.With a 12-14 balanced and 3-card support, opener will have to pass.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

standard is, that suppX are played, as long
as responder can rebid his suit at the 2 level.

If you play want to play suppX above this level,
you should have add. strength, and shortage in
their suit, since you risk playing a 7 card fit at the
3 level.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: The reason for playing suppX is the Law of Total
Tricks. suppX were invented to help you to decide, if
you should go to the 3 level in the part score battle
fight.

[SoTired]

supp dbl was invented to solve this common problem:
1C p 1S 2H 2S
Normally, opener raises spades with 4-card support and only 3-card support with compensating distribution like 3145. But with the 2H overcall, opener will strive to raise with any 3-card support hand. Responder needs law information and also needs 3- vs 4-card support information for possible game.

Support dbls solve this problem by differentienting between the real support hands and the courtesy support hands. The support dbl shows 3-card support with unlimited strength. The direct raise is min opener with 4-card support.

Support dbl is normally only played thru 2H. Responder retreating to 2S does not show 5 cards.

BTW, although passing denies 3-card support, bidding something other than support dbl does not deny 3-card support.

I see no reason that 1H (p) 2C (2D) X is not a support dbl for clubs.

[Walddk]

Support doubles are fine when responder has 5 cards and he can rebid his suit at the 2-level. Mandatory support doubles are not so great when responder has 4 and is weakish, especially if the 4-card suit is weak too.

♠ 10874
♥ A53
♦ Q9
♣ J872

1♦ p 1♠ 2♥
dbl p ?

How do you like it now? Furthermore, it also gives the show away no matter whether you declare or defend.

Roland

[helene_t]

Quote

Mandatory support doubles are not so great when responder has 4 and is weakish, especially if the 4-card suit is weak too.

I disagree with that comment. The alternative to support double is to raise with 3-card support. With support doubles, at least sometimes you will have the option of playing in 3m instead.

[whereagles]

SoTired, on Jun 21 2006, 10:57 AM, said:

supp dbl was invented to solve this common problem:
1C p 1S 2H 2S
Normally, opener raises spades with 4-card support and only 3-card support with compensating distribution like 3145. But with the 2H overcall, opener will strive to raise with any 3-card support hand. Responder needs law information and also needs 3- vs 4-card support information for possible game.

Actually, if I recall correctly, it was invented to solve another problem: avoid the 3-3 fit in case responder had only 3 cards in the major!

[jdonn]

whereagles, on Jun 21 2006, 08:22 AM, said:

SoTired, on Jun 21 2006, 10:57 AM, said:

supp dbl was invented to solve this common problem:
1C p 1S 2H 2S
Normally, opener raises spades with 4-card support and only 3-card support with compensating distribution like 3145. But with the 2H overcall, opener will strive to raise with any 3-card support hand. Responder needs law information and also needs 3- vs 4-card support information for possible game.

Actually, if I recall correctly, it was invented to solve another problem: avoid the 3-3 fit in case responder had only 3 cards in the major!

What??? Where do you get this stuff

[kolay]

jdonn, on Jun 21 2006, 10:19 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jun 21 2006, 08:22 AM, said:

SoTired, on Jun 21 2006, 10:57 AM, said:

supp dbl was invented to solve this common problem:
1C p 1S 2H 2S
Normally, opener raises spades with 4-card support and only 3-card support with compensating distribution like 3145. But with the 2H overcall, opener will strive to raise with any 3-card support hand. Responder needs law information and also needs 3- vs 4-card support information for possible game.

Actually, if I recall correctly, it was invented to solve another problem: avoid the 3-3 fit in case responder had only 3 cards in the major!

What??? Where do you get this stuff

Thanks for the answers guys.

From what I heard, support Double is invented by Rodwell. So...maybe it really just want to avoid 3-3 trump....

[helene_t]

whereagles, on Jun 21 2006, 03:22 PM, said:

Actually, if I recall correctly, it was invented to solve another problem: avoid the 3-3 fit in case responder had only 3 cards in the major!

I read that somewhere, too. Maybe in one of the Points Schmoints books.

[awm]

Just an ethical quibble about support doubles...

If you're really playing a convention that was designed primarily to protect you from 3-3 fits when responder bid a major on three cards, doesn't it obligate you to disclose the tendency to respond a major on three cards to your opponents? Meckstroth and Rodwell don't disclose this, although I too have seen them do it multiple times. Not only that, but when queried about it afterwards Rodwell claims it's "not a psych."

I've seen Fred and Brad alert their 1M responses and disclose this tendency, kudos to them.

[whereagles]

jdonn, on Jun 21 2006, 03:19 PM, said:

whereagles, on Jun 21 2006, 08:22 AM, said:

Actually, if I recall correctly, it was invented to solve another problem: avoid the 3-3 fit in case responder had only 3 cards in the major!

What??? Where do you get this stuff

Now that you ask.. I really can't remember. But Helene seems to have seen that as well, so maybe there's a chance you'll find it somewhere

On another note, I think one should alert 1x-1M if it's systemic to do that on 3 cards if the hand is of some pre-discussed type.

Come to think of it, if the support double was invented to avoid 3-3 fits, if one always plays 1x-1M as 4 cards, then maybe there's no need for support doubles after all!! I think some will agree to this point of view... lol

[jdonn]

Now that I think of it I have heard people make that claim before. But I always thought it was sort of an insinuation with no fact to back it up. I guess only the shadow knows.

[willow23]

I think that you and p simply have to agree on something ..The bidding sequence can qualify it for a support dbl but the level of play may land you in trouble depending on the vulnerability and whether the side has stoppers in spades...So you may need a t/o ish shape, spade stoppers or strength for that dbl even though it can be a support dbl so p can have 2Nt option, 3 clubs or 3 of his suit based on agreement..

You and p decide what other feature in the hand can be expected with that a dbl that forces the partnership to the 3 level.

N.B Generally support dbls should allow play at the two level.

Regards

Willow23

[pclayton]

Before a 2N response to a minor was universally (almost) played as invitational, the specific auction of 1♦-1♥ was systemically played as frequently being a 3 card suit, with the likes of: Axx, KJx, Axx, xxxx. Yes, we used to alert it as well. It was very common for the major to become a lead inhibitor, as a side benefit, and you never got into trouble, since (I think) a jump to 4♥ was barred.

[Winstonm]

IMO support doubles can be a valuable tool when applied properly - obviously, I apply them properly

My views are that support doubles only apply to major suits and only when responder can rebid his suit at the 2-level, so 1D-1H-2S-X is not a support double.

The other strong view I hold is that it is wrong to require support doubles - the support double is like any other bid and should only be used when it is needed - to show a hand with 3-card major support that also has a reason to bid. This does not imply mamixum or minimum but rather suit-play orientation and controls.
In other words, I'd bid happy to make a support double with Axx, xx, AKxxx, xxx of 1D-P-1S-2H-X but with Axx, QJx, Axxxx, Qx I really wanted to rebid 1N so I'm not going to go out of my way to announce I have 3 random spades.

Winston