Re: bad judgment or bad luck?

On May 9, 12:34 am, rhm <r...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

The trouble with this approach is that it is unclear to me what
partner is supposed to do if he has a penalty double of the overcall.
If you can not rely upon that the bidding will not die if you are
strong but have a misfit a cornerstone of the concept of playing
negative doubles gets thrown out of the window.
Have Kleinmann and Straguzzi addressed this issue?

*****************

Yes.  As I wrote, following K-S, they admit that the pair might end up
collecting undoubled undertricks if opener has a minimum misfitting
hand opposite a takeout double, e.g.

QTxx
xx
Axx
Axxx

x
AK10x
KQ10x
Jxxx

They think, and I agree with them, that losing the ability to penalize
opponents when holding a minimum hand opp a penalty conversion is an
acceptable cost to not having an unlimited balancing double.  Their
case boils down to this:

xxx
xx
Axx
Kxxxx

opposite

x
AK10x
KQ10x
AJxx

gives fair play for slam (2-2 clubs, or 3-1 clubs with the Queen
onside and no diamond losers), whereas

xxx
xx
Axx
Kxxxx

opposite

x
AK10x
KQ10x
Jxxx

is a hand that is likely going down in 5c (need to keep club losers to
1, which basically requires the A doubleton clubs to be onside, a 20%
chance.

If you think opener should bid on because he is stronger, then make
responder weaker:

xxx
xxx
xx
Kxxxx

opposite

x
AK10x
KQ10x
AJxx

isn't necessarily a hand you want to be in 4c with either.

K-S and I are admittedly in the minority, although Marshall Miles was
the first to doubt the utility of having opener balance with a double
on any minimum hand with shortness in the opponents' suit, also
wanting a little extra in opener's hand.

Henrysun909