Hi, Ayla!

I've been thinking that maybe we play different structures when we make takeout dbls. We will see. I'll show you how I think about it. These are not conventions in the strict sense of the term; it is a strategic subsystem. Tell me if there would, in fact, be differences, so that we can fine tune.

1) At levels 1 and 2, the only punitive double is over the weak 1NT opening (we play Cappelletti over weak 1NT; therefore, the double is oriented towards punishment. Over strong 1NT, we play DONT and the double, then, shows a hand of any long suit). For all other cases, a double at levels 1 and 2 is not punitive (in rare cases, of course, the doubler's partner can turn the double into a punitive one by passing; but this is an exception and needs a lot of strength in the opponent's suit to do it; a lot of force indeed! But even in these rare cases, the doubler's intention was not punitive).

2) Over 1-suited openings, so a double is a takeout. And shows:

2a) 12-16 total points AND at least three cards in all unbid suits.

OR

2b) 17 or more total points; in this case, with any distribution. The logic behind this is that since the overcall over a 1-suited opening is limited to 16 total points, the only way to show stronger hands is doubling.

How to know whether it is 2a or 2b will become clear after the next item.

3) The responses to the takeout dbl

3a) The opener's opponent passes after the double (1D - Dbl - Pass - ?)

3a1) The weaker the doubler's partner is, the more important it is for him to bid! With zero points, for example, he is obliged to bid! So, having 0-9 total points, the answer will be a minimal bid in the longest unbid suit.

3a2) 1NT - 6-10 HCP and control in the opening suit. The 1NT response is therefore not considered a minimal response as it cannot be done with less than 6 HCP.

3a3) An unbid suit in single jump (below game): invite (usually 10-12 total points).

3a4) An unbid double jump suit: preemptive (usually 6+ cards and few HCP).

3a5) A game: to play.

3a6) Cuebid in the opening suit: forcing to game.

3b) The opener's opponent says something other than a pass

3b1) The logic is the same as in the previous item, but now, of course, the doubler's partner is no longer required to bid and can pass with very weak hands.

3b2) Therefore, if the doubler's partner speaks even though he is not obligated to do so, he shows interest in at least disputing the partial.

4) Subsequent voices from the doubler after a minimal response from the partner (or over a pass from the partner if the partner was no longer required to speak)

4a) Having a hand of 12 to 16 points, the doubler will never speak again! In this case, he has already fully described the hand when he made the takeout dbl, and so all decisions are with the doubler's partner.

4b) Having a hand with 17 or more points, the doubler will speak again even over a minimal response from the partner (or even over his pass, if he was no longer obliged to bid).

5) Subsequent voices from the doubler after a constructive response from the partner

5a) The voices are as natural as possible, disputing the partial or investigating eventual games.

5b) Cuebids in the opponent(s)'s suit(s) are forcing to game.

Regards.

MunRah (you worst pd at BBO J) )