Should takeout doubles on opening hand strength but not shape be alerted? What do you think?
Many players at the clubs I go to have got into the habit of using takeout doubles on any opening hand regardless shape. Isn't it time to make these doubles alertable?
Comments
The relevant rules are Blue Book 3D2 and 3H3. As long as the agreement is that the double should nearly always be pulled, it shouldn't be alerted but should be specifically mentioned on the system card. (That said, I understand that you're recommending a change in the rules rather than asking about the current rules. For the time being, if you consider that knowing what shapes the doubler could have is frequently important, I recommend habitually checking the opponents' system card whenever there's an unalerted double at a low level.)
Note that in general, there are two common sorts of shape-restricted takeout doubles anyway (doubles that are focused on the majors / on the other major specifically, and doubles that are focused on a three-suiter in general). So even among more "normal" takeout doubles, you often have to ask.
Many players who double like this do not know that other players do not, so it would be difficult to teach them to alert.
Players who don't double like this do know that other players do this, so it should not come as a surprise.
Asking players who double like this is unlikely to get a useful answer - they often won't know what the asker is asking.
Over my 1NT 2H (say) by oppo then X by partner is more point showing (10+) than shape. I alert this and the oppos usually ask so no problem. I had an occasion where I was asked and I said 10 or more points and anything from 2 upwards in the doubled suit. Luckily the pass by the hand on my right was alerted and I was told that this denied an honour so I passed with my 2 cards in the suit. Partner turned up with 5 cards in the doubled suit and the oppos were most miffed at the result and called the director who gave a quizzical smile and said carry on!
From a philosophical viewpoint, if more and more people are bidding in a particular way, that argues for it not being alertable, rather than the opposite - alerts are supposed to draw the opponents' attention to anything unusual.
We used to say such doubles were not alertable for exactly the reasons Robin writes (not surprisingly). Now to be honest I see more and more of the better players doubling on balanced hands (admittedly without lots of honours on the doubled suit); and double of a potentially short 1C opening on a 4423 12-count I was now say is 'normal'.
So I honestly think styles are moving in the direction that makes these less likely to be alerted.
If the double is meant to be takeout then there is no problem. If, however, the doubler can be expected to have values in opener's suit then that gives a need for an alert.
AlanB: you are talking about a different auction.
I don't think a double of a 1-level opening is alertable as long as it is ostensibly a 'normal' t/o double and 4th hand is expected to bid.
If you are playing 1NT 2H x as 'any 10+' then is that take-out or penalties? In particular, on what hands is opener supposed to pass?
I would be against changing the rules to make this alertable. As I have said before, a perfect alerting system (where everything unexpected but nothing commonplace would be alerted) is impossible to devise, not least because what is unexpected or commonplace is in the eye of the beholder and varies so much. A good alerting system (where as much as possible that is likely to be unexpected, and as little as possible that is likely to be seen as commonplace, is alerted) is always a trade off between appropriateness/accuracy on the one hand and simplicity/clarity on the other. We have to live with that, and I think the EBU Laws & Ethics Committee has done a good job of striking the balance. Tinkering at the edges should be avoided, and generally is.
I do play what I consider to be a fairly extreme version of this doubling style with just one partner, with whom I only play at one particular club. Robin is right that it is not an issue because the opponents pretty much all fall into one of two groups:
(a) those that don't care and might even be mystified to think that there could be a problem; or
(b) those that know that it is my partner's preferred style, and can ask if they need to know whether she plays it with me.
(In the style we play, whist the doubler may have some hands that are a fair distance away from a double in a more normal "shape-suitable or significant extra values" style, doubler's partner will only pass the double on exactly the sort of hand that would pass a normal take-out double: the double is therefore definitely still for takeout, IMO).
"Does the double show anything about the lengths of suits?" is likely to get the right answer both against people who double like this (they'll just say "no"), and people who don't double like this ("four hearts" and "short in spades, usually two but might be longer or shorter" are plausible answers). So I think it is possible to ask a useful question here.
FWIW, in one partnership, I play that 1NT, (2H), X shows spades; that's pretty much a normal takeout double but I alert it anyway (because we defined it in our partnership as "spades" not "takeout", and the opponents have a right to know what our partnership agreement is).
Frances writes
"If you are playing 1NT 2H x as 'any 10+' then is that take-out or penalties? In particular, on what hands is opener supposed to pass?"
One of my partners replied as follows (so I'm glad you raised the question!):
On our style, we would pass with good trumps (a couple of tricks with length) depending on Vulnerability, knowing partner will have a guaranteed 10 count and at least a doubleton trump.
Few partnerships have discussed sufficiently the positions after 1NT is overcalled. I think the experts are now playing all doubles as Take Out.
As an aside, the Italian Blue team some years ago started doubling suit openings with modest balanced hands. I don't like that style unless I have strength to compensate. But who am I to question those international experts?
Roger
Well there is some current debate as to the reason why these take-out doubles were successful.
bridgewinners.com/article/view/a-reply-to-david-yates-articles/