[helene_t]

Cross-IMPs, favorable vulnerability. Let's say W is dealer, i.e. the 2♠-bidder is South
(pass)-pass-(1♥*)-pass
(1NT**)-pass-(pass)-dbl***
(pass)-2♦-(pass)-2♠****

* 10-15 points, 4+ spades, can have longer minor
** 0-10 points, to play
*** No special agreement
**** ?

[FrancesHinden]

I can't say "everyone plays this as" because in my neck of the woods transfer openings are extremely rare.

However, assuming that NS have not specifically agreed to play a 1S overcall as natural, then this auction is effectively the same as

P P 1S P
1NT P P x
P 2D P 2S

and I know what this means.
Personally I play the double of 1NT as PENALTIES (there have been other threads here suggesting playing it as a light take-out, but I don't like that treatment).

Thus South has doubled 1NT for penalties, implying good spades.
North has pulled that, for some reason.
South's 2S is clearly (to me) natural showing a good suit.

[helene_t]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 28 2007, 12:18 PM, said:

However, assuming that NS have not specifically agreed to play a 1S overcall as natural

I should have mentioned: a direct 1♠ would be Michaels. A direct 2♠ would probably have been natural.

[gwnn]

For what it's worth, I prefer 1♠=takeout, X=heart overcall or big hand and 2♠ as michaels. The lower the bid, the higher its frequency should be.

[helene_t]

gwnn, on Aug 28 2007, 01:37 PM, said:

For what it's worth, I prefer 1♠=takeout, X=heart overcall or big hand and 2♠ as michaels. The lower the bid, the higher its frequency should be.

But suppose it goes
(1♥*)-x-(pass**)-?

where **pass promises some hearts (for example at least 4). Must you take this double out? I think x should say something about hearts.

Hey Csaba, was it you who voted for "smoking something ilegal"? All I'd been doing was eating bananas, that's (still) allowed in the Netherlands.

[gwnn]

I voted Other. And of course you have to pass the X with a hand that would pass 1♥.

[ArtK78]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 28 2007, 05:18 AM, said:

I can't say "everyone plays this as" because in my neck of the woods transfer openings are extremely rare.

However, assuming that NS have not specifically agreed to play a 1S overcall as natural, then this auction is effectively the same as

P P 1S P
1NT P P x
P 2D P 2S

and I know what this means.
Personally I play the double of 1NT as PENALTIES (there have been other threads here suggesting playing it as a light take-out, but I don't like that treatment).

Thus South has doubled 1NT for penalties, implying good spades.
North has pulled that, for some reason.
South's 2S is clearly (to me) natural showing a good suit.

Absolutely on target.

The hand that bids 2♠ on this auction must have a penalty double of a 1♠ opening bid.

[Free]

Opposite transfer openings, I really like my 1-level bids to be natural! So (1♥*)-1♠ natural. I've played a lot of MOSCITO, and I've seen many lose their Major fit because of a simple transfer opening. You get the space (which you don't get after an acol opening), so better use it...

Anyway, without agreements, I think most would consider an immediate 1♠ to be takeout, so passing followed by bidding ♠ is natural. The Dbl in between doesn't change anything to the fact that you definitely have some ♠s.

[whereagles]

If there were a direct dbl of 1♥, this would be a cue. Having passed originally, this should be spades and about 13-17.

[skjaeran]

I think Frederick is correct that 1♠ might be best as natural vs a potential 4c♠-minor canape. But you need an explicit agreement for this to apply.

Missing that I'm in full agreement with Frances (and others) that 2♠ in this sequence is natural.

[Fluffy]

If I didn't have any agreements it would be obvious that 2♠ is a strong ahnd that didn't know how to act over 1♥. If you have areements then I have no clue, depends on your agreements

[helene_t]

My general philosophy (although I don't think we have discussed this) is that if an undiscussed double can be t/o then it is t/o.

So when I chose to double 1NT with my strong 6-card spades it was obviously an attack of the "the-double-shows-whatever-I-happen-to-have" syndrom. OTOH, I think the 2♠ should make it clear that the double was meant as penalty: a hand that would bid 2♠ as t/o here would have acted over 1♥, don't you think?

[awm]

There are a number of ways to bid spades in this auction. Probably there should be a way to bid spades directly over 1♥ (maybe 1♠ is michaels and 2♠ natural?). Certainly passing and then bidding 2♠ over 1nt should be natural.

The normal meaning for a double in an auction like 1Y-P-1NT-P-P-X is a good balanced hand with some strength in suit Y, something "not quite sufficient for a 1NT overcall." So in this auction, I think 2♠ should show some pattern like 5-(3-3-2), not enough spades to have bid them naturally at the two-level (which usually shows six) but suggesting playing in spades or that partner correct with a long diamond suit or both minors.

[mikeh]

skaeran, on Aug 28 2007, 03:34 PM, said:

I think Frederick is correct that 1♠ might be best as natural vs a potential 4c♠-minor canape. But you need an explicit agreement for this to apply.

Missing that I'm in full agreement with Frances (and others) that 2♠ in this sequence is natural.

agreed

[ArtK78]

I find it hard to believe that there is support for a direct 1♠ overcall as natural in this auction.

The usual defense against transfer openings and responses is to have a bid of the suit implied by the transfer (in this case, spades) be for takeout, not as natural. A double normally means a strong balanced hand, but the meaning of double is up to the partnership. If you want to bid the suit bid naturally, you bid it - in this case, 2♥. As for bidding the suit implied by the transfer, there is little use for that - why do you want to bid their suit? If the opening bidder had bid a natural 1♠, would you want a 2♠ bid to be natural?

In those rare instances when you do want to bid their suit, you have to find some other logical way of doing so. Here, the pass over the 1♥ opening bid followed by a balancing double of 1NT followed by a 2♠ bid is a logical way of doing that while showing a strong hand. 2♠ in balancing seat would also show spades, but it would be a weaker hand.

[skjaeran]

ArtK78, on Aug 29 2007, 09:25 PM, said:

I find it hard to believe that there is support for a direct 1♠ overcall as natural in this auction.

Huh - did you notice that we're talking about vs a potentially canape opening? The 1♥ opening could most probably be something like Txxx KJx AKJxx x, to give but one example.

Surely you can see why you'd like to be able to make a natural 1♠ overcall over such a hand.

Nobody advocated playing 1♠ as a natural overcall over a 5+♠ 1♥ opening.

Don't get me wrong, playing 1♠ as a t/o does make perfect sense too.

[Free]

ArtK78, on Aug 29 2007, 08:25 PM, said:

I find it hard to believe that there is support for a direct 1♠ overcall as natural in this auction.

Just to give you an example of a hand which I opened 1♥ with, playing MOSCITO (shows 4+♠, possible canapé, 9-15HCP):

---

On this particular hand, our opps ended in 3NT, nobody ever asked a ♣ stopper...

The opening doesn't promise anything about strength, so they might be stealing our fit! It's like when you open 1NT and opps intervene with 2♣ showing 44+M. Responder can still have a good 6 card Major, why shouldn't he be able to show it?

[whereagles]

Usually, when RHO opens a canapé and you have a good holding in his 4-card suit, the tactics is to pass 1st round and dbl RHO's 2nd suit for take-out.

That argues AGAINST a 1♠ overcall being natural.

[FrancesHinden]

ArtK78, on Aug 29 2007, 08:25 PM, said:

I find it hard to believe that there is support for a direct 1♠ overcall as natural in this auction.

Ummm.... I play it as natural as well against this style of transfer opening.

Basically, when they play transfer openings you have one extra call. You either use 1S as a take-out double, and double to show hearts not strong enough to bid at the 2-level, or you use 1S to show spades and double as take-out of spades.

It's not at all clear to me which is better. While hearts might be a more common holding on length grounds, a good hand with spades is much harder to show any other way.