Lurpoa

Indeed, of of those sequences where you never know how a pick-up partner might will react. All partnerships should have very clear agreements on the of 4NTquantitative. Concerning SAYC: 4NT quanti only defined after a direct raise of of the 1NT and 2NT openers, or after a 2NTrebid after a 2♣ opener. And for BWS2001 2/1 defaults: QUOTE If an non-discussed but clearlyforcing non-competitivefour-notrump bid might logically be interpreted as more than one ofthese alternatives, the priority order of interpretation is (1) ace- or key-card-asking convention, (2) offer of general slam encouragement, (3) control-showing bid.UNQUOTE So, in the proposed sequence: ace asking.

Yes, Double.... at least partner will know we have the majority of points. If I pass, he will not understand any further action.

Yes, Double.... at least partner will know we have the majority of points. If I pass, he will not understand any further action.

Yes, Double.... at least partner will know we have the majority of points. If I pass, he will not understand any further action.

... mind that those sequences do not necessary indicate 2suited hands. 2♠ and or 3♦ could be used to show (very good) uni-colored hands as is suggested in Pavlicek's system. That is why it is so important to agree with partner....

Oh, yes. Indeed, misread the question. Sorry. Indeed, very good question, which need to be resolved by a partnership which needs to to last..... And indeed, because of the risk involved for this intervention after the 2/1 game-force. it is very usefull to gave good agreements with your partner. And indeed all those sequences could indicate different distributions: 5-5s, 6-5s,.... Cannot give a lot of advice, besides the fact, to make sure that your partner understands the same thing. I have no knowledge of partnerships who have resoved the question, but I will do some research, and report here.

After the X, any bid shows extra's... The other interventions are clearly conventional,and you should agree with your partner on the continuations. I would keep the X to show the willingness to double any further bid. Pass is anyway forcing.

To be more precise. In BWS2001 Maximal overcall doubles are played by the opening side, after an overcall in the suit ranking one below the the opened suit, a single raise by responder, and a single raise by advancer.

Yes, very nice... Make sure your partner's understanding of those sequences is the same.....

yes, agreed, but such an alternatve should have been discussed with partner. As already indicated: "without agreement, 2♥=natural. Do not forget that the 2♥bidder hasn't a real good hand, nor even a limit hand: he did take no action on on partner's overcall: 2♥ there would have been a game going cue-bid.

yes, what should this mean ? Is it natural ? 2♥ to play ? Or is it a T/O for the blacks ? Yes, on of those on which you need to agree with Partner. My preference go to natural: partner has shown some values in ♥....

I have done some internet search on "Maximal Double". There seem to be many variations around. This is also clear from all the responses to this treath. So, yes, it is very important to agree on all the sequences with your partner.

"Maximim" doubles are not part of SAYC or of BWS2001, but I think it is sound to play this double for take-out (here, for the reds) or showing general values if responder made a double raise. It is as such that it is defined by the BWS2001 defaults.

Fully agree with the Hog. I would have opened 2NT, but 1D is fine.

I do not think there are any should be's. All that is important is that your answers are compatible with each other, and that your partner has the same agreements. :rolleyes: All goes, as long as you are comfortable with it.;)

Definitively something to agree with your partner. Also BWS2001 doesn't give a response to this. My logic would be: pass= regular hand no stop (partner has to do something!; what is his redouble now ?),. Rdble= a proposal to play 2♦XX with at least KJXX, I would say.

well, I sure prefer a 1♥ opening to pass. If P doesn't bid S, you always have more or less OK 2♥ rebid.

Absolutely forcing. 3NT, showing a stopper. Partner knows I have now no more 4spades and 2 or 3 hearts, ... So he can make a wise decision.....

yes ! Indeed ! when I said penalty oriented, I really meant VERY penalty oriented. By your double you do not necessary promess trumps, just extra trick taling power, and partner should only pull it on exceptional hands.

Yes, I would be most happy to play this system.

3♣ is OK. I myself would open 4♣.

typically a DSIP double - penalty oriented: I have extra's (at least 3.5 DT), not neccessay trumps, your decision partner !

at this vul: 1NT all others: pass

yes, is a good argument....

I have what I told. Partner chooses 3NT. That should be OK. Pass