[32519]

In any partnership agreement, which doubles would be considered mandatory?

The take-out double, negative double and penalty double would surely all be included. But there are literally dozens more to be considered e.g.
1.) Double of a Stayman bid
2.) Double of a Jacoby Transfer bid
3.) Lightner Slam Double

Which doubles would be considered mandatory and why?

Conversely, which doubles could a beginner/intermediate partnership live without?

[gordontd]

32519, on 2011-December-22, 03:12, said:

In any partnership agreement, which doubles would be considered mandatory?

The take-out double, negative double and penalty double would surely all be included.

I occasionally fill in at a rubber bridge group which plays without negative doubles, and that's quite normal here.

32519, on 2011-December-22, 03:12, said:

But there are literally dozens more to be considered e.g.
1.) Double of a Stayman bid
2.) Double of a Jacoby Transfer bid

Do you play these two differently from each other? I suspect for most players they are the same thing. However, since there are two entirely different ways these are commonly played, neither can be considered to be mandatory.

32519, on 2011-December-22, 03:12, said:

Conversely, which doubles could a beginner/intermediate partnership live without?

Most beginners don't double much - whatever their agreements, they don't recognise situations for using doubles.

[Flameous]

Without any more specific agreements, doubles of artificial calls are penalty.

That should be enough. Sure there are many places for double where some other use might be better, but there are much more important things to consider for B/I partnership.
Some stuff that needs to be agreed upon though is whether you play support doubles and mainly if not, what does the double mean in those places. (We just had a thread about this)

Lightner double is a rare tool and you shouldn't really worry about it too much. It comes logical once you realize that doubling freely bid slams is stupid and thus the double works as a wakeup call.

Some doubles B/I can definitely live without: Snapdragon, stolen bid, relay answer doubles (DOPI/DEPO included, although it's simple, the frequency for need is minimal), maximal (overcall) doubles, lightner doubles of 3NT contract. There is probably more which I haven't played

[32519]

Stolen Bids
Quite a few club players play “stolen bids” after partner opens 1NT and RHO intervenes with an overcall at the two level. A double here advises the 1NT opener that the opponent’s overcall “stole” the bid that the responder wanted to make.
The purpose of the stolen bid double is to allow Stayman and Jacoby transfer sequences to proceed as if no overcall had been made. Normally, in both 2/1 and SAYC, Jacoby transfers are OFF when opponent’s interfere. Thus, in the sequence
partner opp you
1NT 2♣ dbl
playing “stolen bids”, your double is Stayman. In this following sequence,
partner opp you
1NT 2♥ dbl
your double requests a transfer to spades.
There are two serious difficulties with “stolen bids” after 1NT openings.
1) Firstly, they deprive you of the penalty double which is a powerful deterrent to opponents contemplating an overcall after a strong 1NT opening. Playing stolen bids is an open invitation to your opponents to have a field day with obtrusive interference at the two level and deprives you of the ability to penalise them for their impunity.
2) Secondly, it is not always possible to make a stolen bid, especially when the overcall is artificial, as in the Landy and Cappelletti defenses to no trump openers. In Cappelletti, 2♦ shows the majors, so you can hardly want your partner to transfer into hearts with a stack of hearts behind her. The same is true of a Landy 2♣ bid showing the majors. Now Stayman doesn’t make a lot of sense.
One reason that experts eschew stolen bids is because they usually employ Lebensohl to cope with interference after 1NT. Lebensohl retains the penalty double, but it’s a complex convention (entire books have been written about it) and the average club player is unlikely to want to invest the time to learn it fully.
You can read the rest here http://www.bridgeaho...stolenbids.html

This is my last post for 2011. Wishing you all a Merry Christmas and only the best for 2012. May goodness and mercy follow you all the days of your lives!

[Vampyr]

32519, on 2011-December-22, 13:08, said:

Stolen Bids
Quite a few club players play “stolen bids” after partner opens 1NT and RHO intervenes with an overcall at the two level.

Do they? I have only ever heard about this convention on these forums, and have never seen it in action.

[Mbodell]

Vampyr, on 2011-December-22, 23:35, said:

Do they? I have only ever heard about this convention on these forums, and have never seen it in action.

It is very common in the club game in the US. I played it in Seattle at the nationals with a pickup in the open pairs the first night. It obviously isn't very good, but just as obviously doesn't come up that often and is not a huge deal. It is more common here than 4♣ always gerber.

I actually like stolen bid doubles of opponents interference over Ogust. When pass means my Ogust response was below the opponents call, double means I'd make the call the opponent did, and a higher suit is free to be bid. But that is a little different than stolen bid of interference above 2♣ after 1nt.

[Vampyr]

Come to think of it, I guess I play "stolen bid doubles" over 1NT-(2♣) when the 2♣ bid does not have an anchor suit.

[Free]

"Stolen bid" is only useful if they intervene with step 1 (for example 1NT-(2♣)-Dbl = stayman). Whenever opps intervene higher, stolen bid sucks! Advising "Stolen Bid doubles" as mandatory is really poor advise imo.

One double that I would recommend to everyone: "Dbl of stupid bids = penalty".
And if you want simple agreements that allow you to have comfortable competitive auctions, I would suggest to play every Dbl as takeout, with some specific exceptions.

[Yu18772]

I dont think that there "mandatory" doubles, what is mandatory is to have a clear agreement in which situations double is penalty (and all others are for t/o). The ones you listed are not high on my list at all. A simple and effective double that I would add is maximal double. Also have an agreement till what level lead directing doubles promise real suit and sugest to compete, and at what level it is just for lead. "Stolen bid" (except over 2♣ like Vampyr) is a very poor agreement imo....

[Vampyr]

32519, on 2011-December-22, 13:08, said:

Lebensohl retains the penalty double, but it’s a complex convention (entire books have been written about it) and the average club player is unlikely to want to invest the time to learn it fully.

This is not necessarily true; it is a matter for partnership agreement. With nearly everyone I play with, we play Lebensohl with takeout doubles.