Glenfield Bridge Club –
Technical Library
Take Out Double
Last Updated on 17th
August 2008
|
The take out double of
an opening bid of one of a suit from the opposition shows one of the
following hand types: |
|
|
1 |
A
three suited hand of opening values or better with the shortage in the suit
opened. |
|
2 |
A
one or two suited hand that is too strong for a simple or jump overcall. |
|
3 |
A
balanced hand that is too strong for a one no trump overcall. |
|
This hand, from the 2002 final of the Gimson is a good example of the three suited type. |
|
|
ª AQJ4 © 2 ¨ AK32 § K876 |
After
right hand opponent opens one
heart, this is a straightforward double, showing the other three suits. |
|
This hand comes from the
Derbyshire Green Pointed Swiss Pairs on 27th
September 2003 and provides an
example of the balanced type. |
|
|
ª K82 ©
AKT4 ¨
A2 § K752 |
Left
hand opponent opens
one heart and, after two passes, you have to find a bid in the protective
position. You are too good for a
bid of one no
trump, so you begin with a double intending to rebid no trumps at the
earliest opportunity. |
|
This South hand does not seem to fit any of the hand
types described in the introduction. |
|||
|
|
North ª 532 © AT8765 ¨ 6 § J32 |
Board
25 Dealer
N EW
Vul |
Yet,
when the hand was dealt at Glenfield Bridge Club on 10th August 2005,
the best North/South scores went to those South’s who doubled East’s opening
bid of one spade. After
a double, North feels confident to bid hearts, even if West makes a barrage
bid of two spades, and South has sufficient additional values to make a cue-bid
in spades, asking if North can stop the suit for no trumps. North cannot, and the heart game is
reached. Tim
Glover elected not to double, instead preferring to bid diamonds. It is one of those awkward hands; two
diamonds is an underbid, but the suit isn’t good enough to bid three
diamonds. He chose to bid two
diamonds and his partner eventually languished in three hearts. With
a site of all four hands, it is easy to see how to take advantage of the
well-placed diamond suit to make eleven tricks. Nick & Teresa Daniels and the North/South winners, Pam
Leeson & Olive McClain, were the only pairs to read the position at the
table and, having bid the game, made an overtrick for a shared top. However, if East cashes the ace and king of spades and
switches to a club; North has a very difficult decision to make. Playing dummy’s nine seems to
guarantee the contract whenever East has either minor suit king, while, if
the position of the minor suit kings were switched, rising with the ace of clubs and
taking the diamond finesse
risks going down when West has the king of diamonds
and East the king of
clubs. Best
East/West score went to the winners, Ray Le Vesconte and Brenda Coltman, who
defeated five hearts by one trick. |
|
West ª T98 © 42 ¨ 87532 § K54 |
|
East ª AKQJ4 © 93 ¨ KT § 876 |
|
|
|
South ª 76 © KQJ ¨ AQJ94 § AQ9 |
|
|
|
There is no great need to vary the method over a prepared minor or, indeed,
the Precision opening bid of one diamond. |
|||
|
Board
6 Dealer
E |
North ª AKQJ43 © KQ8 ¨ 863 § J |
|
North/South
went adrift in this auction from the Glenfield Club Pairs on 14th
May 2003. After
two passes, West, playing Precision,
opened one
diamond. North considered his
hand too powerful for a strong
jump overcall and began with a take out double. East passed and South, wishing to deprive West of the
opportunity of introducing a four card spade suit at the one level barraged
with a bid of two hearts. West passed
and North, concerned not to miss a slam, bid three diamonds. South, thinking that North was now showing
a hand that was too good to make an immediate jump overcall in diamonds,
decided the auction was going nowhere and passed. The
play is not recorded, but North finished three down for a bottom. I
think North would have been wiser to bid either two spades or three hearts
over two hearts. South perhaps
should have just bid one heart, although this would allow East/West to find
their club fit. Indeed the second
best East/West score went to Brenda Coltman and Sylvia Horn who made an
overtrick in three clubs. Most
pairs played in spades, making between eight and eleven tricks; nine looks to
be about right; it seems a poor defensive effort not to collect at least a
club, two diamonds and a heart. I
guess that the North’s who made eleven tricks received the lead of ace of hearts and
another from East. |
|
West ª 7 © J74 ¨ KT94 § AKQ54 |
|
East ª T985 © A3 ¨ Q52 § T963 |
|
|
|
South ª 62 © T9652 ¨ AJ7 § 872 |
|
|
|
A take out double, in
the protective
position, can be made on lesser values. |
|
|
ª Q8 © 65 ¨ A8653 § AQ42 |
In
this deal, from the National
Masters Pairs of 2002, I had to cope with an opening bid of one
heart on my right. Although there
are sufficient points
to compete, the shape is unsuitable.
The diamonds are too flimsy and I have nothing sensible to say should
I start with a take out double and partner respond one spade. So, for now, I pass. Left hand opponent bids two hearts and,
after two passes, it is my turn again.
Now I consider the odds are in favour of bidding. The opponents have found a fit, so we
should have a fit too. I shall make a
take out double and, if partner bids two spades, I shall bid three
diamonds. In the event partner bid
three clubs and the bid had its desired effect when the opponents pressed on
to three hearts and were defeated by one trick. We could have made ten tricks in either minor but we gained
most of the match points by pushing the opponents to the three level. |
|
Many players use the
take out double as a defence to pre-emptive bids. |
|
|
ª K © K765 ¨ KJ83 § AK76 |
In
this deal, from the Buildrite Cup, left hand opponent opened three
spades and, after two passes, it was your turn to bid. Those pairs who could double for take out
fared relatively well as partner, with a good spade holding, was able to pass
and defeat the contract. Those who
played Film
or Fishbein did less well, finishing in a four heart contract that went
four down. |
|
It is, of course, possible to convert a takeout double
into penalties; although it did not work well for North/South on this deal
from the Derbyshire Green Pointed Swiss Pairs on 27th
September 2003. |
|||
|
Board
7 Dealer
S Game
All |
North ª 9 ©
KT653 ¨
AKQ862 § K |
|
Even a four
figure penalty wasn’t enough to give Tim Glover and Peter Neville an average
score against Chris Jagger and Amanda Griffin. Tim opened one
club, Amanda overcalled
two spades, Peter doubled
for takeout and Tim elected to pass for penalties. Amanda was just able to collect four
tricks in spades for a score of –1100.
However, twelve tricks are easy in no trumps or hearts and thirteen
will be made if the queen
of hearts is found. With thirty
three points
and plenty of distribution most pairs bid the slam. No doubt Paul Bowyer would say Tim got what he deserved for opening
one club instead of one
spade. |
|
West ª QT8652 ©
Q98 ¨
7 § 973 |
|
East ª J3 ©
42 ¨
J943 § J9652 |
|
|
|
South ª AK74 ©
AJ7 ¨
T5 § AQT4 |
|
|
|
Tim’s Statistics MPs |
Top |
Partner |
TO * For |
MPs |
% |
TO * Against |
MPs |
% |
|
20 |
Peter Neville |
1 |
18 |
90.00 |
2 |
20 |
50.00 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
1 |
18 |
90.00 |
2 |
20 |
50.00 |
|
Tim’s Statistics IMPs |
Partner |
TO * For |
Imps |
Imps/Bd |
TO * Against |
Imps |
Imps/Bd |
|
Peter Neville |
1 |
-4 |
-4.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
3 (4) |
9 (5) |
3.00 (1.25) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (5) |
-13 (-8) |
-13.00 (-1,60) |
1 |
5 |
5.00 |
|
|
Peter Neville |
1 (6) |
-8 (-16) |
-8.00 (-2.67) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2006 |
|
6 |
-16 |
-2.67 |
1 |
5 |
5.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Neville |
2 (8) |
20 (4) |
10 (0.50) |
1 (2) |
-3 (2) |
-3.00 (1.00) |
|
|
Peter Neville |
3 (11) |
2 (6) |
0.67 (0.55) |
1 (3) |
6 (8) |
6 (2.33) |
|
|
Peter Neville |
|
|
|
2 (5) |
4 (12) |
2 (2.4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for 2007 |
|
5 |
22 |
4.40 |
4 |
7 |
1.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|