[jeffford76]

The specific auction on which this came up was the following:

1NT (X) XX (P)
2C (?)

1NT is 12-14, X is penalty, XX forces 2C showing a bad hand, possibly
planning further action.

I'm interested in both preferred agreement, and also what you'd expect undiscussed with a reasonable partner.

[655321]

I usually play double as takeout, and pass is forcing up to 2♥ - i.e. we are not allowed to pass them out in 2♦ undoubled, but we can pass them out in 2♥.

[shevek]

Some people play your pass as forcing to 2♦ or at 2-level but we don't. Partner could have a flat Yarborough, it may not be your hand.
I like X here as takeout of clubs, the suit they might be about to play in. Looks like a pass/correct auction.

[Codo]

After some learning by doing we do play now that pass is forcing till 2 NT and that all doubles are take out.

[gnasher]

It's not enough to agree that pass is forcing. You also have to agree whether the forcing pass promises values, and what advancer is supposed to do with a bad hand.

At different times, I've played:
- All bad hands bid immediately (so pass shows values).
- Bad hands with a 5-card suit bid immediately; bad balanced hands pass and pull partner's double.
- Bad hands with a 5-card suit bid immediately; bad balanced hands pass and leave in partner's double. This is only workable if they're in a minor: -180 might be bearable, but -670 isn't.
- All bad hands pass and pull (so pass is either bad or planning to leave in a double).

All of these are in one way or another unsatisfactory.

Sometimes I sidestep the problem entirely by not playing penalty doubles of 1NT in second seat. The problem is less severe after a fourth-seat double, because advancer usually gets three opportunities to run.

[rbforster]

Don't some people play that specifically

(1N)-X-(P)-2♣

shows any really bad possibly balanced hand with no better bid? This frees up the other suits to be more natural bad hands and hence pass promises reasonable values (i.e. not afraid to sit for a double later on strength).

[shevek]

Rob F, on May 15 2009, 04:22 PM, said:

Don't some people play that specifically

(1N)-X-(P)-2♣

shows any really bad possibly balanced hand with no better bid?  This frees up the other suits to be more natural bad hands and hence pass promises reasonable values (i.e. not afraid to sit for a double later on strength).

Depends a bit on vulnerability, scoring and their methods.
Say I hold a 3-4-3-3 Yarborough and it goes

(1NT) - X - (no) - ?

If we are vul & they are not, passing for -180/280/380 looks better than bidding for -200/500/800.
It's different if responder had redoubled but many (not me) play that as the start of an escape.

If responder's pass forces redouble (Swine say) you have more options. I like direct suit bids to be weak 1-suiters. Pass shows values but could be the start of a scramble.