[Fluffy]

♠K65432
♥-
♦AJ84
♣AQ3

All vul, IMPs

1♠-(double)-redouble-(2♥)


If you let him partner will double 2♥ for penalty.

[Hanoi5]

I think I prefer to bid 2♠ ahead of partner. It should show at least 6 cards and a non-minimum hand. Over his 2NT I'd bid 3♦.

[the hog]

Hanoi5, on 2013-October-07, 19:28, said:

I think I prefer to bid 2♠ ahead of partner. It should show at least 6 cards and a non-minimum hand. Over his 2NT I'd bid 3♦.

On the contrary, 2S would certainly show a minimum opening. Having said this, I prefer not to let partner x with a void in my hand. I will bid 2D, which is far better imo than 2S. Why show 6 cards when you can show 9+?

[DJNeill]

Pass. An immediate 2S would be a weak hand *and* not able to sit for penalty. Pass then pull shows a GF hand with no interest in sitting for penalty. This is a flexible hand. Partner may have the typical BAL 10-11 with doubleton spade, but let's see what happens.

So on the given penalty double, I return to 2S.

[nige1]

Fluffy, on 2013-October-07, 17:40, said:

All vul, IMPs ♠ K 6 5 4 3 2 ♥- ♦ A J 8 4 ♣ A Q 3
1♠-(double)-redouble-(2♥)
??
If you let him partner will double 2♥ for penalty.

It depends on agreement but I prefer DJNeill's style: Pass = 10, 3♦ = 6, 2♠ = 5.
After passing, when partner doubles, 2♠ = 10, 3♦ = 8, Pass = 7. It's tempting to sit for partner's double.
Pass then pull shows sound opening values and ♥ shortness.

An immediate 2♠ might show something like
♠ K Q x x x x ♥ x ♦ K Q x ♣ x x x
For us, even an immediate 3♠ would be weak with extra shape. For instance
♠ K Q x x x x x ♥- ♦ K Q x x ♣ x x

[the hog]

nige1, on 2013-October-07, 21:29, said:

It depends on agreement but I prefer DJNeill's style: Pass = 10, 3♦ = 6, 2♠ = 5.
After passing, when partner doubles, 2♠ = 10, 3♦ = 8, Pass = 7. It's tempting to sit for partner's double.
Pass then pull shows sound opening values and ♥ shortness.

An immediate 2♠ might show something like
♠ K Q x x x x ♥ x ♦ K Q x ♣ x x x
For us, even an immediate 3♠ would be weak with extra shape. For instance
♠ K Q x x x x x ♥- ♦ K Q x x ♣ x

The first example is a weak 2 in my book, the second example is close to a 4S opening. However I have reconsidered my post and do believe that Dan's approach is better than 2D.

[BillPatch]

the hog, on 2013-October-07, 19:50, said:

On the contrary, 2S would certainly show a minimum opening. Having said this, I prefer not to let partner x with a void in my hand. I will bid 2D, which is far better imo than 2S. Why show 6 cards when you can show 9+?

While 2♦ may be "far better" than 2♠, it is insufficient, so the director might disapprove.

[the hog]

BillPatch, on 2013-October-08, 02:35, said:

While 2♦ may be "far better" than 2♠, it is insufficient, so the director might disapprove.

I meant 3 of course.

[Trinidad]

I would pass first, then bid 2♠ which is forcing for one round.

Rik

[ggwhiz]

Trinidad, on 2013-October-09, 01:05, said:

I would pass first, then bid 2♠ which is forcing for one round.

Agreed but with a specific discussion with pard that a direct 2♠ shows a worm and this auction is only 98% forcing depending on which one of us redoubled. My partner is so glass 1/2 full I might hear "but it was a really good 9 count". She likes all her hands.

[Fluffy]

Nobody suggests a 2NT take out before or after double?

[nige1]

Fluffy, on 2013-October-10, 04:31, said:

Nobody suggests a 2NT take out before or after double?

The Sharples used a bid of notrump immediately after the redouble as the gypsy' warning not to trust their opener: usually stop in the bid suit and subminimum. e.g
♠ K J x x x ♥ A Q ♦ x x x x ♣ x x