[Fluffy]

---

MPs, we play transfers over 1♠ and north decided to go with double cos he had no clear rebid over 2♦-2♥ treating the heart suit as 4 cards. Obviously this wasn't a success, but had North had 3433 or 2434, should he double 2♦ or not?

[gnasher]

I think North's first double is fine, and his second double just shows extra values and a balanced hand. With the South hand, I'd now bid 2♥ - that can't be a four-card suit, because I passed over 2♦.

What's the lower limit for a transfer to hearts? If weak hands with six hearts are already covered, maybe North's hand should double and then bid 2♥.

[aguahombre]

gnasher, on 2011-April-17, 08:37, said:

I think North's first double is fine, and his second double just shows extra values and a balanced hand. With the South hand, I'd now bid 2♥ - that can't be a four-card suit, because I passed over 2♦.

What's the lower limit for a transfer to hearts? If weak hands with six hearts are already covered, maybe North's hand should double and then bid 2♥.

I vote for the second paragraph. It seems the main idea of the transfer structure here is to cover the weak hands with six hearts (pass if opener merely accepts) or the invite+ hands with 5+ hearts (bid again after mere acceptance). This leaves the double and then 2H for the actual responding hand --not strong enough to invite game, and only 5 hearts.

The two doubles would be something like 2-4-4-3 and desire to compete or defend.

So, North gets the blame for not using the full implications of the structure; Apparently South did and was double-crossed (no pun intended).

Those of us who don't use xfers after an overcall would be in a pure guess; responder would double twice; and opener would get all the credit or all the blame depending on whether responder was 2-5-3-3 or 2-4-4-3.

This post has been edited by aguahombre: 2011-April-17, 10:02

[ahydra]

2nd double by North looks a bit odd, why not just bid 2H? That said, the double is definitely for takeout, so if North isn't bidding 2H South should.

ahydra

[Fluffy]

we both though that we would take north's 2♥ as forcing, but actually this doesn't have to be, we are moving from NFBs to transfer and not enterilly used of them already.

Does anyone think that a double of 2♦ is penalty?, or would it be penalty if doubling 2♥?, or the balanced strong hand is the normal meaning?

[aguahombre]

Fluffy, on 2011-April-17, 15:49, said:

Does anyone think that a double of 2♦ is penalty?, or would it be penalty if doubling 2♥?, or the balanced strong hand is the normal meaning?

Given your xfer structure...as stated above, IMO the double of 2D should be the same strength as the given hand, but one more diamond and one less heart. Not penalty, just informative. South would probably leave it in without a fifth club or a fourth heart. The idea that South should have removed to 2H is influence by the actual North hand which misbid with the 2nd double instead of 2H.

[JLOGIC]

I would have taken it as penalty