differentiating between competitive and constructive raise in competition

[AL78]

If an auction proceeds as follows:

 

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h1s3h]133|100[/hv]

 

Is it reasonable to use double here as a constructive or mixed raise of spades, and 3♠ as a weaker competitive raise based on LOTT?

[DavidKok]

That's how I play it - double is a 'maximal' or 'game try' double and 3♠ is competitive. Because you have only two bids you can't use the traditional three ranges (preemptive, simple raise, invitational) so you have to fudge a bit to make it fit in two bids.

[Winstonm]

If an auction proceeds as follows:

 

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h1s3h]133|100[/hv]

 

Is it reasonable to use double here as a constructive or mixed raise of spades, and 3♠ as a weaker competitive raise based on LOTT?

It is quite reasonable as there is no room to explore and strict penalty double would be rare. It does give up the cooperative, i.e., card-showing double though, so there is a slight downside - a bigger downside in direct proportion to the aggressiveness of the opponents.

[AL78]

This is a hand that came up at teams:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s3h8765dajt85cq96&w=sq742hqd9763c8754&n=skthaj943dq42ckjt&e=saj9865hkt2dkca32&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1h1s3h3sp4sppdppp]399|300[/hv]

 

I had no agreement with this partner how strong the 3♠ bid could be so had to guess whether or not to raise to game. I guessed wrong and went one down doubled, thankfully not expensive as 4♠ was one down at the other table undoubled so only a couple of imps out.

[mikl_plkcc]

I will consider 3♠ as competitive, X as takeout to choose a suit with game forcing value but not spade support, 4♥ as a game-forcing support.