Monday, April-27-09

Hand Evaluation -  Standards ( Balancing Double )

PITBULLS:

There is a benchmark for balancing doubles established many decades ago that should still remain true today. The watermark minimum for a  balancing double should be 10 HCP preferably with HCP's in quick trick combinations. This benchmark came about because Bridge teachers always recommended to subtract a "King" from your double T/O double in the balancing seat. A T/O was equivalent to an opening bid so the 10 HCP standard was born for the balancing double. As a rule , doubles should show defensive hands  & Q bids or just bidding should show offensive hands. This standard makes sense as the opponents have shown at least 20 HCP so far when responder has bid. If you start balancing with a 7 HCP double , you need partner to have passed 13 HCP’s or more just to have a fighting chance. This is well against the odds.

        This standard is needed now more than ever with "modern openers" & psychic responses. You cannot believe the opponents to get a "lie of the land" in a HCP sense. You must believe that partner will be disciplined with around 10+ HCP for her double. The correct shape is only one criteria for a double , the other is defense . A player tonight held ♠A109xx ♥xx ♦x ♣J109xx   & the auction went 1♦ by me , 1♥ by Ilya my partner followed by 2♥ by me. All pass around to this hand. He doubled because he had the two unbid suits . This is violating the sanctity of the 10 HCP defensive standard for choosing a double. He should bid 2♠ so partner always has the negative inference that he was not strong enough to double. A double describes your hand  not just asking partner to bid. Partner may convert for penalty or double the opponents later on or bid game/slam based on your initial double. Partner cannot visualize 5 HCP’s for a double,  that is simply nonsense.  With a 5-5 you can lower your double to a good eight ♠A109xx ♥xx ♦x ♣KJ10xx   but most would already be in the auction holding that hand. You need a benchmark for doubles or Bridge anarchy would result. You would always be forced to believe the opponents to judge the auction. Balancing them into game would be a popular pastime. Failing that , going for a number would be more frequent. Not knowing whether  to compete again would be another side effect. Not a very good strategy against so called “modern openers & responses”.

        Nowhere is it more important to adhere to this standard when you decide to double in a misfit auction as a balance. We feel a double in misfit auctions should be co-operative T/O . You have values in openers or responders first bid suit but you are essentially making a T/O double. In all misfit auctions there is a good chance that the opponents might be in trouble . Leaving the option of converting the T/O double makes the most sense. The location of your HCP’s are of great importance as Bridge is played in a clockwise direction. Their 12 HCP opener can get decimated to a 6 count pretty fast when cards are sitting poorly for them. Modern bidders leave themselves open for these type of disasters as their collection of HCP’s they opened are not necessarily in quick trick combinations. You do not always have to bid in Bridge to get a plus. Defending a misfit auction doubled can also be very lucrative. In order to make the proper decisions in these balancing double situations, partner will play you for at least 10 HCP.

        What if you do not have the required HCP's , but you want to disturb their auction anyway ? Define a balancing Q bid as a T/O bid . Kantar recommends a 2♣ balance to always show the majors when their auctions dies in 1NT ( not opened ). I go a step further & define 2♣ to be any offensive hand that you cannot double due to lack of defense or cards in their first bid suit. This bid gets the job done to compete for partials & disturb their 1NT resting spot. Selling out to a 1NT partial  is considered old fashioned Bridge in today's bidder's game.