Inverted minor after double?

[jillybean]

Playing inverted minors..

 

1♦ (X) 2♦ inverted or not?

[neilkaz]

Off for me, playing Jordon 2NT is a limit raise, 2♦ is a normal raise and 3♦ is preemptive as usual while a balanced 10+HCP can XX.

 

I want to show support at the two level almost anytime I have 4♦ and a few HCP.

[rogerclee]

Standard is that we can redouble and then bid diamonds to show "balanced" diamond raises, and 2NT to show more distributional diamond limit raises. It's too important to just be able to compete when you have 4 diamonds, and being forced to bid 3♦ everytime you want to compete in diamonds it not very logical, considering that we already have two other strong diamond raises.

 

So 2♦ is just a simple raise.

[skjaeran]

I've always played 2NT as inv+ with diamonds, 2♦ as a simple raise and 3♦ as preemptive.

[gwnn]

What the previous 3 posters describe are standard. There are two other ways I've seen diamonds supported:

 

-flip flop: 2NT is a preemptive raise, 3♦ is a limit raise, proponents claim this right-sides 3NT more often than not

 

-transfers: 2♣ is a balanced-ish raise of 9+ hcp, that doesn't want to redouble and 2NT is an unbalanced raise, strongly suggesting diamonds.

[whereagles]

You can turn OFF (and perhaps should) the inverted raises because a good deal of the subsequent gadgetry is slam-oriented and that becomes far less likely after the dbl.

[kgr]

Playing inverted minors..

 

1♦ (X) 2♦ inverted or not?

I think standard is off, but think the DBL is in fact making it more useful to be able to preempt.

I play inv min on and 2NT is very weak raise.

[orlam]

Playing inverted minors..

 

1♦ (X) 2♦  inverted or not?

I think standard is off, but think the DBL is in fact making it more useful to be able to preempt.

I play inv min on and 2NT is very weak raise.

But it also makes the single raise more important. Is it really better to have two preemptive raises, and no single raise?