[PrecisionL]

Shugart23 said:

so when bidding goes 1H -(x) - ?, what are your bids? what is a redouble ?

Redouble is usually 10-11 hcp and balanced, 1♠ is 4+♠, 1NT = 8-10 hcp, 2 of a minor is 5+ cards and not forcing, raises are usually 4-cds and jump bids are fit showing with a good 5-cd suit.

[PrecisionL]

Double post, deleted.

[Shugart23]

Here is Blue Team Club..... somewhat similar to your methods....the pass followed by the double showing 8-10 HCP and 3 card support is interesting.....I am not sure if this is 'old-fashioned' thinking or if it actually a better suited method to canapé bidding.....leaning toward the latter at the moment. Hopefully Ken R. or another experienced canapé player will jump in at some point...

In the case of opponent’s double of 1D,1H or 1S
 new suit at 1 level is normally 5 cards and forcing;
 new suit at 2 level is passable;
 redouble shows 10+ HCP, balanced or semi balanced.

Over the opening of 1H and 1S
 the simple raise remains natural (maybe a little weaker than normal),
whereas the jump raise is weak and unbalanced;
 2NT shows a balanced 4 card limit raise with two defensive tricks
 jump shifts are natural and invitational, unbalanced;
 1NT is 8-10 HCP with at most 2 cards in the opening suit
 the pass followed by double shows a 3 card constructive raise (8-10 HCP)

[hrothgar]

Shugart23, on 2016-February-14, 04:38, said:

Hopefully Ken R. or another experienced canapé player will jump in at some point...

You've had plenty of comments from experienced canape players.
Your problem is that you are confusing a nebulous diamond opening with canape.

FWIW, I have played Blue Club for years.

It was a really good system, but its 50+ years old and competitive methods have really advanced since then.

[Shugart23]

No, I really am not confused with the nebulous Diamond.

The only reason I brought up BTC is because it is the only document I have found that deals with direct doubles in a canapé system. I will readily admit that I may completely off base...But IF it is true that when one open's 1H or 1S playing canapé that there is a 40 percent chance that partner has a longer side suit, it seems the 'modern' method completely discounts this non-trivial possibility..

It seems like there ought to be mechanisms for Opener and Responder to explore for the better fit over the take out double of one of a Major...the transfer scheme doesn't seem to contemplate this notion.

[hrothgar]

Shugart23, on 2016-February-14, 09:07, said:

No, I really am not confused with the nebulous Diamond.

The only reason I brought up BTC is because it is the only document I have found that deals with direct doubles in a canapé system. I will readily admit that I may completely off base...But IF it is true that when one open's 1H or 1S playing canapé that there is a 40 percent chance that partner has a longer side suit, it seems the 'modern' method completely discounts this non-trivial possibility..

It seems like there ought to be mechanisms for Opener and Responder to explore for the better fit over the take out double of one of a Major...the transfer scheme doesn't seem to contemplate this notion.

Said it before, I will say it again. These systems don't use delicate exploratory auctions trying to find your best fit.
These systems assume that its best to exert maximum pressure on the opponents by bashing to an adequate contract as quickly as possible at the expense of (potentially) failing to identify our best contract.

Take a look at the following:

MOSCITO uses a 1♥ opening that shows 4+ Spades (could have a longer minor) and ~9-14 HCP

Here's the response structure that I use absent competition

3♠ = 4 card value raise
3♥ = 6 Hearts and 3 Spades (non forcing)
3♦ = 6 Diamonds and 3 Spades
3♣ = 6 Clubs and 3 Spades
2NT = limit raise+ (4+ card support)
2♠ = 3 card value raise
2♥ = natural non forcing
2♦ = natural non foricng
2♣ = natural non forcing
1N = Natural non forcing
1S = relay

If I have "constructive" values and three card support for partner, the overwhelming majority of the time I am going to be bidding 2♠.
Its entirely possible that we'll play 2♠ on a seven card fit when we have an eight or even a nine card fit in a minor.

If you are uncomfortable with this approach, you might want to chose a different bidding family of bidding systems.

[kenrexford]

With the MICS 1D opening, there is no anchor suit. The "anchor" is shape. Responder does not know what shape is held, but he knows that the shape is extreme, meaning either a 6-card minor or 9+ in diamonds and a major. Either extreme shape would be sufficient for a two-level opening blind, so competition that does not remove that level is not a problem for Opener, in a sense.

The key, IMO, is to facilitate Opener's rebids, first, in case he needs to go higher than that to complete pattern, or to dissuade the same if needed. Secondarily, to find the occasion of the fit in the long Responder hand.

XX as 10+ is not exactly "right," but close. Old fashioned bids that are still around are not necessarily bad because of being old. Longevity is good. That said, 10+ is not how I really look at it. Rather, I think of XX as tolerance for a three-level completion, as the minimum. Maybe I have strength for 3NT. Maybe I have Law protection no matter what partner bids (e.g., 3+ clubs, 5+ diamonds). But, HCP is usually 10+.

Still, I like MICS responses so much that I play systems on. Hence, the XX accordingly is different. Hence, if lighter end, typically minor oriented, or at least a problem major. 4153 and 9 makes sense as X, because 1S, although OK, is not as descriptive, and XX is more enabling. 4315, in contrast, is better handled by 1NT, as it describes well and focuses well.

[Shugart23]

Ken, what are your 'normal' responder bids when your partner's 1S first seat opening is doubled ? Thanks..

[kenrexford]

Shugart23, on 2016-February-14, 11:19, said:

Ken, what are your 'normal' responder bids when your partner's 1S first seat opening is doubled ? Thanks..

If 1S, Suit/Lead is OK.