[jjbrr]

 Phil, on 2011-May-18, 08:50, said:

I would expect the double to show something like: Kx QTxx xx Kxxxx.

(with 2 spades and some values we XX first)

[Phil]

 jjbrr, on 2011-May-18, 09:03, said:

(with 2 spades and some values we XX first)

Yes I read that.

Is "some values" really an 8 count?

[gnasher]

 Phil, on 2011-May-18, 08:50, said:

It also seems to me that if the overcaller doubles 2♦, then that is takeout, which should confirm that this double is also TO.

Why?

[JLOGIC]

Phil, I mean, this was not an undiscussed low level double. This was a specifically agreed upon auction where double is 0-1 spade and penalty. We can discuss the merits of this agreement, but that was the agreement in place, what do you want from my life haha?

Kx QTxx xx KTxxx would of course XX 1S. That is the point of this agreement. If you have a hand with 2 spades that wants to compete, you XX first. If you have a hand with a stiff spade and no suit to bid immediately, then you have a penalty double with short spades.

[Phil]

 gnasher, on 2011-May-18, 10:36, said:

Why?

Because there isn't a better way to bid AKxxx, Kxx, x, AQxx?

[Phil]

 JLOGIC, on 2011-May-18, 10:52, said:

Phil, I mean, this was not an undiscussed low level double.

nuff said

[JLOGIC]

 Phil, on 2011-May-18, 10:53, said:

Because there isn't a better way to bid AKxxx, Kxx, x, AQxx?

He did not mean why is double takeout, he meant why does it logically follow that because one sides X is takeout, the other ones has to be also (it doesn't actually logically follow, hence his question).