Tuesday, May 11, 2004 5:55 AM

D.S.I.P. - Cavendish

 

PITBULLS:

 

Stan Cabay wrote:

 

Gromov's hand from the Cavendish. Vul: None

 

Q4

KJ108543

KQ

A6

 

P-P-1♣-1♥ (Gromov)

1♠-2♥-2♠-4♥

4♠-P-P-?

 

So what should Gromov do? DSIP or what?

 

Bob Crosby wrote:

 

Yes , I would double saying I want to bid 5♥ but I have defense . The 7th heart makes it an offensive hand but the 7-2-2-2 and defensive cards means that partner should decide with my input. Yes , Gromov had a number of better sequences rather then a leap to game. This ambiguous bid now necessitates a D.S.I.P. double.

 

Stan Cabay wrote

 

Good decision, Bob, assuming partner understands the amount of defense you promise and leaves the double in (maybe +300 rather than maybe -300).  "Amount" is the critical

criterion which breaks or makes the usefulness of high-level DSIP doubles, in general.

 

I played this type of double (at the 5 and 6 level only) many years ago, but gave up on them because it was difficult to determine what constituted a defensive trick. We called them double/undouble agreements, and you or maybe Barton were the source.

 

The problem remains. How much defense does your double of 4S promise on Gromov's hand below? Should partner pull with 1 defensive trick only? I realize this all depends on context, but to be effective, context must be defined as well.

 

Going back to Gromov's bidding, after 2S, he had a number of  choices other than an immediate 4H call. How would 3C, 3D, 4C, 4D followed by 4H (or dble) differ in meaning from an immediate 4H followed by a DSIP dble? What about first doubling 2S (DSIP to show values in both minors?) and then following through with 4H or another DSIP or both?

 

                Bramley

                KJ6

                A

                J53

                KJ8732

 

Petrunin                            Gromov

983                                     Q4

Q762                                  KJ108543

A109                                  KQ

Q95                                    A6

 

                Compton

                A10752

                9

                87642

                104

 

Gromov actually bid 5H (never heard of DSIP) and was -100 undoubled (as Zia says, " people don't double enough at IMPs"). What a sick bid by Compton (maybe they play support

doubles and Bramley forgot), but it worked - an extra +50.

 

Bob Crosby wrote:

 

Yes , possibly the D.S.I.P. double made up for the inaccurate bidding initially . A jump to game is the most ambiguous bid in Bridge . This is why you need a D.S.I.P. to clarify what kind of game bid you made later in the auction.  Each D.S.I.P. situation has a different defensive criteria . An overcall with a limited raise by partner should define the double as “booking “ the contract. Partner can then make his decision accordingly.