[rduran1216]

All red matchpoints.

1C p p x 2C ?

What does a double in this spot mean?, and furthermore what would you bid with

AJxx Axx Kxxxx x

if the auction continues

1C p p x 2C x p ?

[CSGibson]

I think X here means responder has both majors. With your example hand I would bid 2♠.

[Phil]

Had this discussion before and I am 100% in the camp that double is penalty. I can cue or bid a major with two and its strange to have to wait for a reopening double to penalize.

[straube]

Mike Lawrence treats it as responsive (both majors).

Now 1C P 1S P 2C X is penalty.

The difference being that with your sequence partner has acted.

But 1C P 1S dbl 2C X is penalty despite partner having acted.

Gets confusing.

When responder bids 1N and opener rebids his minor, dbl by you is takeout.

When responder bids 1N and opener rebids his major, dbl by you is penalty.

[whereagles]

By Robson/Segal lore, it's take out. The rule is

"Delayed dbls are take out of the 2nd suit (penalty of the 1st if relevant) except when RHO bid and pard took positive action in his turn."

(1♣) pass (pass) dbl
(2♣) dbl

Take out (the exceptional case). But

(1♣) pass (1♦/M) pass
(2♣) dbl

Take out of responder's suit, some length in opener's 1st suit. And

(1♣) pass (1NT) pass
(2♣) dbl

Penalies. Take out of responder's suit is not possible since he didn't bid one, so only the interpretation of penalty of the first applies.

[Fluffy]

My meta agreements are that this is clearly take out, however I agree with Phil that this particular auction penalty is more useful.

[OleBerg]

Take-out, two suits. But in practice it will look a lot like "1 major" or "both majors".

Reopener is expected to bypass diamonds to show a four-card major. (Maybe not in imps, when one or both hands are passed.)

Consequenses:

(1♣) - P - (P) - X
(2♣) - X - (P) - 2♦ = Denies a four card major. (Will not happen often.)

(1♣) - P - (P) - X
(2♣) - X - (P) - 2♥
(P) - 2♠ = Spades and diamonds.

Note that if reopener bids 2♠ in the last sequence, it is heavily with odds, that he has 4 diamonds.

[MrAce]

whereagles, on 2011-March-08, 04:38, said:

(1♣) pass (1NT) pass
(2♣) dbl

Penalies. Take out of responder's suit is not possible since he didn't bid one, so only the interpretation of penalty of the first applies.

That doesn't add up.

Responder bid 1 NT, that doesn't mean he does not have a 4 card suit. He has either ♣ or ♦.

-If he has ♣, penalty double does not make sense.

-If he has ♦, penalty double still does not make sense.

[whereagles]

MrAce, on 2011-March-08, 18:03, said:

That doesn't add up.

Responder bid 1 NT, that doesn't mean he does not have a 4 card suit. He has either ♣ or ♦.

-If he has ♣, penalty double does not make sense.

-If he has ♦, penalty double still does not make sense.

It does add up. It doesn't have much use, if that's what you mean.

Suppose that the suit is a major:

1M pass 1NT pass
2M dbl

then you'd probably agree this dbl is ok as penalties. Now, the meta-rule of R/S doesn't distinguish between both case, so you either change rules or stick to it, even though you're only going to use it once every 2 years (you might have

A
KQJx
xxxx
KQT9

and didn't want to overcall 1NT).

[dake50]

Trap passed.
Thanks for giving me the chance
to suggest a penalty bonanza, partner.

[han]

I play it as responsive.

[gszes]

my gut feeling is that the player behind the 2c bidder
will have a trap pass on the rarest of occassion BUT
that is not the reason for the x over 2c being for
takeout vs penalty.

Even with a club stack behind the 2c bidder you are
probably going to get a good score if p cannot
x again. Even this is a secondary consideration
to the following.

There is simply no way to recover (except via luck)
if the 2c bid was needed by the player behind the
2c bid to properly describe their hand. This does
not matter one whit imps vs mp it is simply a
decision to (maybe) forgo a rare monster penalty
in order to avoid mini to large disasters.

Using this logic alone it seems prudent to accept
the concept of the 2c x as takeout.

[peachy]

straube, on 2011-March-08, 01:09, said:

Mike Lawrence treats it as responsive (both majors).

Can you give a reference in one of his books?
Not doubting what you say, just asking for the reference.

[Free]

I like it as responsive. With a penalty, just pass and hope partner doubles again.

[matmat]

I'd take it as responsive. If I had a penalty oriented hand I would hesitate for a little while and then pass, hoping noone but partner noticed.

[whereagles]

matmat, gezus man.. you ever thought of narrowing your interests?

Here, I'll give you some encouragement

[tolvyrj]

Depends on u agreements IMO. Unless there is another agreement though i would take it as bid u major prd, i could be dbling with K less in my hand from balancing seat over a 1 C.