Sunday, March-15-09

Hand Evaluation – The T/O Double

PITBULLS:

The T/O Dbl belongs in the overcall family of bids. When you make a T/O double , you are in effect overcalling in 3 unbid suits at the same time. This is where the similarity between an overcall & a double ends though. An overcall has a variable HCP range & is an offensive tool. A T/O is similar to an opening bid & like an opening bid promises defense. We need quick tricks for a T/O double , like we do for an opening bid.  I have a horrible hand like ♠x ♥QJxx ♦QJxx ♣KQJx , I do not make a T/O of 1♠ even with this perfect shape unless on the terrorist vulnerability. The correct shape is only one criteria for the T/O double , suitable defense is the other. This criteria is necessary for balancing doubles , competitive doubles or any T/O orientated double that you can think of. Do not double just to get in there & compete or push them up. Bad things happen like partner now doubling the opponents into game. Partner making wrong decisions in competing or bidding game. The opponents now wake up & bid  a game they should have reached in the first place.  I repeat , the correct shape is only 1/2 the criteria,  so learn to look at your quick tricks before you double.

        What about shapely T/O doubles you ask ? This strategy is exactly the same as "shapely opening bids " . You have controls when you lack the HCP's .  ♠x ♥A109x ♦Axxx ♣K10xx  is an automatic double of 1♠ even though you have less HCP's than the previous hand. The difference this time is the quality of your HCP's . They are quick defensive tricks so partner will not be mislead with your T/O double or your opening bid. When you want to bid without defense , just overcall or use a toy especially NT as a T/O tool. Partner will give you leeway as you chose that route but did not double. The sandwich 1NT or a 2NT balance or any number of Q bids promises offense rather than defense. Preserve the integrity of all doubles to indicate defense. Bad doubles ( no defense ) like bad opening bids are the leading cause of Bridge disasters. You are just fooling partner & destroying partnership Bridge.

We do not like trapping unless we are showing partner terrible duplication of value in their suit. We do not trap just because we do not have the correct shape for a T/O double. In order to get into the bidding quickly , we subscribe to "off shape" T/O doubles. This philosophy needs a concept called "equal level conversion". The auction goes 1♦ & I hold ♠AKxx ♥AQ10x ♦xxxx ♣x so I double rather than trap with nothing in their suit. If partner bids 2♣ , I equal level convert to 2♥ as a pass or correct bid. Equal level conversion requires that most ( all ? ) one suited hands be shown by an overcall or a Q bid ( jump ) . A T/O double holding a one suited hand destroys the equal level conversion concept. A T/O double with one suit ( old fashioned ) does not fit into our T/O double scheme. A T/O double guarantees two or 3 of the unbid suits unless you have a planned NT rebid at some level. In order to play equal level conversion , you give up 1 suited T/O doubles. Not a bad trade off , in my opinion.

“Equal level conversion” made popular by Eric Rodwell is based on the rank order of suits. When you are not forcing partner to a higher level , you do not require extra for your non shape T/O double. If you jump convert , you are showing distribution with two long unbid suits. If you force partner to a higher level to bid , you are showing extra values. When you make off shape doubles in Bridge as you do in balancing spots , playing negative double theory in re-opening position or combating pre-empts, you need a way to scramble when the opponents escape a penalty double. Equal level conversion concepts in those instances are just considered standard Bridge. Rodwell just extends equal level conversion concepts to the direct seat at the one thru five levels. We have bought into his genius ( madness ?)