OleBerg

Assume you don't want my reply then. Cant tell, but if it's somthing like: "Convention X is best, all the experts play it." It's ok not to reply.

If the field can't bid 7♥ I'm not in the tourney. On the rare occasion, where I have to go through a qualifying round, I'd still bid 7nt, practising for the final. Ok, I'm a little spoilt by playing in Denmark, where qualifying rounds are often fairly balanced, and reasonably long.

Arguments please, gentlemen. I am trying to figure out whats best.

Obviously I'd prefer 7nt. My system would get me to 7♥ though.

Something simple and efficient: Vs. interference at the 1-level: Double is 5-7. (Remember to discuss if double sets up a force, and in which situations it does.) New suits and nt is natural and game-forcing. Opponents suit is Gf with no good bid. Vs. interference at the two-level: All bids are natural and GF. Double is GF with no good bid.

Well, it is constructed to handle weak nt-ranges, which are thick on the ground in Denmark. It is really good to be able to differentiate betweem weak and strong major hands, when you face a weak nt. If you reverse the 2♦ bid with the2♥/2♠ bids, you have the "standard-defence" among danish top-level players. I like it vs strong nt-ranges too, but persuade me to change it! Why is Raptor good? (Honest question.)

Assume you don't want to use double as penalty for some strong nt-ranges, what should it then be used for? If it matters, the rest of the defence vs nt is this: 2♣: Both majors. 2♦: Strong one-suited Major. (Normally 6-cards, but can be 5, and a 5-card minor.) 2♥/2♠: A weak hand with the suit. My own inclination would be 5+♦'s and excactly 4♠'s. The range I'm not so certain about.

You must have nerves of steel. I'm not sure that I'd survive the pause whilst partner thought about whether to leave it in. I'm as cold as strawberry-icecream. No really, I have it as a specific system note, that passing an overcall and the doubling a new suit has this meaning. It occurs so infrequently, that I cannot say if it is good or bad. I simply adopted it from Robson & Seagal.

4♣ It is so rare that I get to make a value bid, that I cannot resist it. As I consider the bid to be non-forcing, I know I'm a little on the heavy side,

No. A stand-out double. Two redoubled overtricks? Certainly the nt-opener cannot redouble, or convey any other information to partner. Thus, it is responder who must redouble. There are only 4 (some might say 5) surplus points in the game, if they want 26 HCP for game to be safe. For responder to redouble, he will need all suits stopped, and enough strength to ensure 8 tricks in the outside suits. Not easy, especially not if the nt range is 15-17. Furthermore, I do not find ten tricks outside hearts and clubs that likely.

The main argument for 2nt is, that it very often gets you to the right game. That is, at least if you do not play anything fancy. If the system-constructor is alive to the danger of these troublesome hands, and have made a device that checks if 2♥ was a three-card suit, the bid gains a lot. At least in my opinion.

Very good tread. I've been convinced that 4♣ is the bid at openers second turn. Something that wouldn't have occurred to me.

Are you sure you didn't push your opponents to an always cold 3♣ for 110 or 130, or perhaps 2♠ for 140, when your teammates went down in 1NT since their ace of hearts was doubleton? Anyway, if your point is simply to compete for more partscores, you will lose a lot more than you gain playing penalty doubles when compared to just about any other possible meaning for double. There is a reason penalty doubles are completely out of fashion, the expert world is not simply oblivious. As I wrote earlier, I play penalty-doubles vs all NT-ranges, and I haven't found it that bad. If you lower your requirements to something like 16, or maybe 15 and a good lead, the double is not that infrequent. And if you have the agreement that it doesn't establish a force, it really isn't that dangerous. Yes we might be endplayed at trick one, but declarer might be endplayed at trick two. And our strength sits over declarers. It also removes some strain from the player in the balancing seat. To be fair, almost all of my opponents plays a weaker range, so my experience vs the 15-17 nt is somewhat limited.

X Penalty of Diamonds, takeout of spades.

2nt. Taking my medication like a grown boy.

Would he bid 5♥ on the actual hand? I don't think so. I wouldn't myself, but my partner has often shown better judgement than me, especially in high-level competitive auctions, so maybe he would

Good for partneship confidence. God told East to lead a heart, partner told her to lead a spade. Edit: It goes without saying that a heart lead is a standout on the East hand. (Still I said it.)

Cant keep my fingers away from the double card. If partner bids hearts, I'll convert to spades, showing spades and diamonds. If I thought West was a sound bidder, I'd naturally bid 3♦. Edit: Misread vulnerabilety. I'll go with the obvious 3♦.

I've still had terrible luck my whole life doing this, so I'm gonna stay simple and check for a fit. If I can unearth a 5-3 fit and still suggest 3nt, I will. If not, I stay simple like jdonn.

Having started with a transfer for clubs, I consider myself a 2♣ bidder. Now I bid 2nt. I dont like it, but at least it describes my hand. Partner didn't double 2♠, so a minor-runout is not unlikely, and will be welcomed. I like taking the active risk much better than taking the passive. Partner need nothing more than ♣QJXX and the ♦Q, for game to be on. Had I bid 1nt, I would have passed now, and liked it even less.

Me 2

4♥. Of course this requires you to have the agreemnet that 4♥ doesn't show many HCP.

Obvious 1nt. (Transfer to clubs naturally.)

Incidently, I'd never take the same seat as my opponents client, but leave it to a weaker player, like partner. :blink:

For an Obcessive Compulsive Doubler like me, this is a WTP.