Posted 2015-May-12, 16:20
Take these two auctions, which I think capture the pros and cons of the differing approaches in a nutshell.
2♣-4♦-x
and 2♣-p-2♦-4♦-x
In the first, the reason I think it is better to play double as values is not that this is better when responder does have values (it isn't) - it's better when responder has a bad hand. The point is, if responder's double merely shows, say, 0-4, that could be on any shape whatsoever. If you play pass as weak, you can then pass a reopening double when balanced, and bid with good shape, which is exactly how we are supposed to bid against high level preemption.
In the second auction, I think it's right for double by opener to show a balanced hand that is suitable for partner bidding on (eg 4M on a 5-card suit). Pass should force responder to double unless he has very good shape, and is consistent with an unsuitable strong balanced hand. The advantage here is that the 2♣ opener gets two bites at the cherry with distributional hands, so he can bid a direct 4♥ with a one suiter, and a delayed 4♥ with a more flexible hand.