[InTime]

After 1NT(partner) - 2x (natural opps) - X(you)
Which is the best to play here?:
Double for take-out showing a hand that is willing to compete to at least 2NT - it may be converted for penalties by the NT opener.
or
Double for penalties demanding partner to pass.

Apparently there are different views here which one is better.
I will appreciate your view here with rationale in regard to the one or the other.
Regards

[helene_t]

If you don't play Lebensohl (or something equivalent) you have to play it as take-out as you otherwise have too many hands that are difficult to bid.

If you do play Lebensohl I don't think it matters much as long as you agree with your partner.

[jmcw]

InTime, on 2011-October-13, 10:39, said:

After 1NT(partner) - 2x (natural opps) - X(you)
Which is the best to play here?:
Double for take-out showing a hand that is willing to compete to at least 2NT - it may be converted for penalties by the NT opener.
or
Double for penalties demanding partner to pass.

Apparently there are different views here which one is better.
I will appreciate your view here with rationale in regard to the one or the other.
Regards

You will have more hands with scattered values 7+, and a willingness to compete than pure penalty.
If you have a penalty X, you can pass and "hope" partner can re-open.
So playing X as take out gives lots more flexibility and caters to the much more common occurances. I expect most advanced players will have a similar agreement.

[wank]

penalty if it's a weak nt. take-out if it's strong.

imo

[NOosAnCE]

Take out doubles will be more frequent, partner can still convert it to a penalty double. This means that you pass with 4+ cards in opponents suit and partner is forced to double with shortness (xx) in that suit. Competing for a partscore is important. You can use this in combination with Lebensohl as well as with Rubensohl.

[helene_t]

wank, on 2011-October-13, 12:31, said:

penalty if it's a weak nt. take-out if it's strong.

Agree.

A weak nt is similar to a preempt in this respect.

[gnasher]

I don't see why one would play different methods after opening a weak notrump. The main reason for playing takeout doubles after 1NT(15-17) (2HE]) is that otherwise a hand like Kxxx xx Kxxx Jxx would be unbiddable. After 1NT(12-14) (2HE]), Kxxx xx Kxxx KJx would be equally unbiddable if we didn't play takeout doubles.

[Fluffy]

IMO against weak players it is better to play penalty doubles because they come more often, but soon as you move to higher levels you should move to take out wich is more useful.

[jjbrr]

Fluffy, on 2011-October-14, 13:08, said:

IMO against weak players it is better to play penalty doubles because they come more often, but soon as you move to higher levels you should move to take out wich is more useful.

Sort of. I think weak players don't bid as often over NT, though. Like when someone says weak player I think of Grandma Ethel who has never made an aggressive overcall in her life.

I think penalty doubles are best against the players who haven't played for very long but think they're great at bridge. The kinda guy who has 56 pages of system notes and understands how important it is be aggressive in the auction, but lacks any judgment whatsoever and has no idea how to bid correctly using standard methods.

Doubling those guys is where the money's at.

We'll call him the perpetually unlucky scientist.