[kgr]

You play kind of SAYC
What is:
1♥-(DBL)-2♣
Is it forcing?

[flytoox]

No. It only shows a good suit.

[Double !]

conventional wisdom says nonforcing. then you can get involved in discussions about what to do after you redoubled to show your 10+hcp (distribution irrelevant) when the bidding comes back to you.

there are some of (like me) who tend to ignore the double and keep your system on.

to each his/her own.

[mike777]

Lawrence plays it nonforcing.
A decent 5 or 6 card suit and about 6-9 points.

[Chamaco]

In undiscussed pships, it is nonforcing.

However, there is a point in ignoring the dbl altogether and make it forcingm, but this should be specifically stated before, in the pship's agreement.

[han]

Nonforcing.

Many people on the forum prefer to play transfers here, and have the best of both. I"m one of those people.

[whereagles]

Textbooks usually define 1M-dbl-2x as non-forcing. It shows a misfitted weakish hand, trying to find a better contract, something like: x xxx KQJxx xxxx (1S-dbl-2D)

Nowadays most people think this classic treatment is not really very good because

1. The 1M is 5-cards anyway, which makes 1M-dbl a decent contract. Besides, the double is very seldom left in.

2. It is usually more important to use the bid to showing some kind of support. Transfers, for instance, is a good use for it, as they cater for a huge amount of hands.

[luis]

Trasfer to diamonds.
In a near future this will be as standard as transfers over 1NT are today, most good pairs are already playing transfers after 1x-Dbl or will be playing that in a near future, the method gives more room and more flexibility. The ability to distinguish a bad 3 card raise from a good one is quite important in competitive auctions.

[coyot]

whereagles, on Jul 24 2005, 11:31 AM, said:

Textbooks usually define 1M-dbl-2x as non-forcing. It shows a misfitted weakish hand, trying to find a better contract, something like: x xxx KQJxx xxxx (1S-dbl-2D)

Nowadays most people think this classic treatment is not really very good because

1. The 1M is 5-cards anyway, which makes 1M-dbl a decent contract. Besides, the double is very seldom left in.

2. It is usually more important to use the bid to showing some kind of support. Transfers, for instance, is a good use for it, as they cater for a huge amount of hands.

Well, I'm quite happy with textbook approach - but not for the reason of finding a "better" contract (as fearing 1M-dbl- would be passed out) but to show that I am alive and willing to compete.

I use the approach that even levels are nonforcing and odd levels are forcing - and it has done me a lot of good - esp. at matchpoints, that is.

If you play any sophisticated major raises (bergen, hardy), you can have 1NT (in 2/1 GF style) used for "solid" 2M raise and direct 2M raise as preempt.

[kgr]

TRANSFERS:
- I suppose they would apply over any 1X-(DBL) ?
- Do they only apply to 2-level calls ?
- After 1X-(DBL)-2Y ; opener will reject transfer with extra's?
... Any webpage with more documentation on this?

This would give for transfers:
- after 1NT
- we already play: 1NT-(2X)-3Y is transfer (rumpelsohl)
- and we could add : 1X-(DBL)-2Y is transfer
... anything else?

[luis]

kgr, on Jul 24 2005, 09:53 PM, said:

TRANSFERS:
- I suppose they would apply over any 1X-(DBL) ?
- Do they only apply to 2-level calls ?
- After 1X-(DBL)-2Y ; opener will reject transfer with extra's?
... Any webpage with more documentation on this?

This would give for transfers:
- after 1NT
- we already play: 1NT-(2X)-3Y is transfer (rumpelsohl)
- and we could add : 1X-(DBL)-2Y is transfer
... anything else?

Many pairs play tramsfers after 1x-X some only after a major suit opening.
The standard treatment is that with a "normal" opening hand opener accepts the transfer, refusal of the transfer shows a strong hand.

Luis

[helene_t]

I think first rdbl and then a free bid should be GF, at least if it's a major suit (maybe you can first rdbl and then cuebid (if opps bid a suit) if you have a GF with a minor suit.

If an immediate freebid shows 6-9, how do you distinguish invitational hands from GF hands?

As for transfers: Probably a good idea (except that 1NT as transfer for clubs tends to wrongsite a 3NT contract but I wonder if this is more than an academic issue). But if you are into artificial methods, maybe it's worth considering whether rdbl as business is the best use of that call. You want to penalize the opponents, but at the same time you give them extra bidding space to escape. Not that I'm aware of a better treatment, just something to think about.

Btw, Meckwell play
1♦-(dbl)-?
rdbl = hearts
1♥ = spades

[whereagles]

Using redouble as transfer makes sense over a 1m opening, because in that case it is much harder to diagnose a misfit (opener can have 3 cards) and opps will play at the 1-level anyway. Over 1M dbl, using redouble as business is much more attractive, especially with 5-card majors. Misfits are easier to detect, and opps usually have to play 1 level higher.

As for the other transfers, I once wrote down a couple of rules for opener's follow-ups. It was something like

1M dbl 2x pass (2x = transfer)
2M = min hand 11-14 with either 6 cards in the major or 0-1 cards in the transfer suit.
3M = the usual: good 6 carder with around 15-17.
Accepting transfer = fit or semi-fit (xx or Hx), min hand, around 11-14.
Accepting transfer in jump = honest support, at least xxx. Game forcing!
New suit (non reverse) = 11-14, natural 54, usually no interest in the transfer suit.
New suit (in reverse) = 15-20, natural 54, forcing to 2NT.
New suit (in jump) = 18-20, natural 54 GF.
2NT = 15-16 balanced or with 0-1 cards in transfer suit and no better bid. NF.
3NT = 17-19, as above.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

for memories sake, I would suggest, that you play
2C in the given seq., i.e.

1H - (X) - 2C

similar to the seq.

1H - (1S) - 2C.

Not optimal, but I doubt that your loose of efficiency will
count for much.

With kind regards
Marlowe