[1eyedjack]

it goes
1C - (1S) - X - (2S)
??
back to you, the 1C opener.

What if anything do you require by way of extras to volunteer a red suit at the 3 level?
If X promised 4 hearts, but 4 diamonds are not guaranteed, does (and how) your answer vary according to the particular red suit held?

Does your answer vary by conditions of contest? The particular hand that gave rise to the query was MP, both vul but feel free to vary.

[ArtK78]

3♦ would have full values for a reverse.

3♥ is the type of hand that would bid 3♥ on this auction if partner's call had been 1♥ (Yes, I know - 1♥ is not legal over 1♠. But you have to act as though it were and that was partner's call). Certainly not a dead minimum, but you would not be promising significant strength.

This should not vary among various types of contests.

[aguahombre]

3 Diamonds, indeed would be full reverse strength, for our partner has not promised any length in the suit. We cannot afford to only use a neg double of a 1S overcall when we have both reds; we would get shut out much too often.

We treat it as Art suggests, as if partner had responded 1H. However, bidding 3H after the spade raise, or 3C after the spade raise can actually show full extras if we employ good/bad with mere desire to compete.

In reference to the title: When the O's have BAR, we would do well to forget natural meanings of NT bids and use them as tools instead.

[mikeh]

As agua suggested, this is a great situation for some form of good/bad or bad/good 2 notrump. We can use double to show the natural 2N bid: partner can still get us back to protecting our stopper by bidding 3♠ if he wants to get us to 3N. We will almost never hold a pure penalty double here. In fact my experience suggests we can take the 'almost' out of that sentence.

That means that double is surplus to requirements and can be coopted for an artificial purpose, thus allowing 2N to be artificial.

I agree with both Art and agua that 3♦ is a full reverse, since I know of no player who uses the double to promise diamonds.

If not playing a fancy 2N, then imo 3♥ can be a little lighter than Art suggests: when the opps jam us, the usual approach is to move the lower limit of a bid down a notch. Thus 3♥ would include a heavy 2♥ hand and all but the heavy 3♥ hands, had rho not bid 2♠. If we have a heavy 3♥ call, we just bid game.

The alternative puts way too much pressure on partner to reopen should we pass.

[1eyedjack]

Many thanks for all this. Now you are in the other seat.

Please rank in order of preference (or marks out of 10 if you wish), alternative plans for dealing with this hand in the expectation that LHO is about to bid 2S whatever you do, which is then passed back to you.

It has gone
1C - (1S) - ?? to you, who hold:

S:xx
H:Q9xxx
D:AJTx
C:Kx

Option A: X then X
Option B: 2H(f) then X
Option C: X then 3H(nf)
Option D: Other

[mikeh]

I would double, but I occasionally play (more accurately, played since I don't anymore) with good players who'd bid 2♥. I'd bid 2♥only if I were a passed hand or you reversed my minors or if I were 1=5=4=3 same values.

If I doubled, which I would all the time if unpassed, I would absolutely double again the second time.

My own view is that double then double scores 20 out of 20, but I don't claim it is perfect. And I definitely respect those for whom 2♥ over 1♠ is permissible.

Btw, if I double and partner bids 1N, I play system (two way new minor) on: 2♣ puppet 2♦, 2♦ artificial gf, 2♥ natural. There are good arguments for a different method, using the artificiality of 2♠ as allowing for a different structure: perhaps 2♦ transfer to hearts as one component, but I'm a simple soul.

A = 10
B = 7
C = 1

And I give C 1 only because someone thought it was worth mentioning, not because I think it has any intrinsic merit: introducing a bad 5 card suit at the 3 level when partner will often hold a stiff or doubleton makes me feel ill. Picture partner with Axx x Kxxx AQxxx.

[Zelandakh]

Although Good/Bad is pretty much the standard way in positions like these, there is a variant that works for intermediate level play - a competitive double. Here your direct rebids show extras, essentially unaffected by the interference, while doubling shows a hand that wants to compete but without extra strength. This means that 2NT retains its natural meaning. I do not recommend this over G/B but it is nice if you do not want to keep track of when 2NT is artificial and when not.

At the other extreme, I could envisage playing something like X as clubs + extras or big balanced; together with 2NT = diamonds; 3♣ = nat competitive; 3♦ = good heart raise; 3♥ = nat competitive.

For the second set of questions, I think option A is clearly the best of the 3 and dislike the immediate 2♥ quite a lot more than Mike.