[helene_t]

In Ben's recent thread it was mentioned that
1♠-(X)-XX-(2♥)
pass-(pass)-3♣*
is forcing. I suppose that means (effectively) GF in this case. Hence an immediate 2♣ could be as strong as 11 points.

Yet in Hardy's book I read that a failure to make a freebid implies tolerance for opener's suit. I don't think that agreement is "standard" but I might be wrong. In any case Hardy's words usually have some weight I suppose.

So this sounds as if Hardy's range would be 0-11 which seems unplayable (isn't it?). OTOH I can imagine the freebid should show a decent suit which you can't have with 0 points, so maybe it should be 4-11 or such.

In one partnership I play it as 8-11. With other pds I haven't discussed it.

[fromageGB]

Over a double I always play "system on" so a 2/1 is a GF. A redouble shows values and a possible desire to penalise, so the "Ben sequence" ending in 3♣ is NF but invitational with heart shortage. As you also have spade shortage, it obviously implies good diamonds as well, so may be corrected to 3♦.

[han]

About 6-11 if NF for me.

Since when do Hardy's words have weight? He was not a Rodwell or a Kokish.

[andy_h]

I remember quite a while ago that I used to play (agreed with partner) that it was system on after a X, as in 1NT was still forcing but a 2/1 is forcing 1 round like back to standard american as XX-ing with all strong hands or somethin got the auction a bit too uncomfortable. But of course, nowadays you can take up the gadget of transfers after 1M-(X), but failing that and playing 2/1 as NF, like Han (6)7-11 is probably what I would prefer. 6 counts like those KQJxxx that you just can't really pass.
0-11 imo is too crazy

[Gerben42]

7 - 11 to me.

[helene_t]

lol, all seven options are tied until now

But Han's and Gerben's answers seem to suggest that the options I chose were unfortunate.

[ArtK78]

Assuming that you do not play 2♣ over an opponent's takeout double as conventional, it shows clubs and less that the values to make a redouble (again, assuming that you don't play the redouble as anything other than 10 HCP, any shape).

So the range is 0-9 with long clubs.

This is the old Goren definition of 2♣. How players play it today varies widely. With some of my partners 1M-(x)-2♣ is a good 3 card raise of the major (less than a limit raise). With others it is natural and not forward going, but I doubt that it would be bid on a zero count.

[mikeh]

5-9 looks ok to me.

0-11 or 0-9 is partnership destructive.

BTW, I wouldn't pay much attention to Hardy's ideas.. the only reason anyone ever thinks of him is that he happened to write the 1st comprehensive book on 2/1.. but very little of what he wrote was his... and he directed far more than he played, from what I recall.

I don't mean to be unkind to him.. he was a pretty good player, but I don't think any one would ever have placed him in the first rank.

[jtfanclub]

helene_t, on Jun 23 2008, 05:17 AM, said:

Yet in Hardy's book I read that a failure to make a freebid implies tolerance for opener's suit. I don't think that agreement is "standard" but I might be wrong.

The way I do it, which I'm sure is miles away from standard...

If I have 8-11*, clubs, and no tolerence for partner's suit, I just bid clubs the first time.
If I have 8-11, clubs, and tolerence for partner's suit, I XX the first time, and when partner can't make a positive noise I just give up and bid 2♠.
So for me, XX and a new suit really is GF.

*adjusted for the usual crap. xx x xxx AQT98xx counts as 8.

[pclayton]

5-9 is OK. So is a max of 11.

[helene_t]

In the auction we discussed in the other thread
1♠-(x)-xx-(2♥)
pass-(pass)-3♣

I learned that opener's pass is forcing (could be a strong hand but could also be a hand that will accept partner's penalty dbl).

Suppose 2♣ would have been 5-9. Thus xx followed by 3♣ would be 10+. That seems unplayable to me.

Would Lebensohl or something similar apply to distinguish 10-11 from GF?

[mikeh]

helene_t, on Jun 23 2008, 11:56 AM, said:

In the auction we discussed in the other thread
1♠-(x)-xx-(2♥)
pass-(pass)-3♣

I learned that opener's pass is forcing (could be a strong hand but could also be a hand that will accept partner's penalty dbl).

Suppose 2♣ would have been 5-9. Thus xx followed by 3♣ would be 10+. That seems unplayable to me.

Would Lebensohl or something similar apply to distinguish 10-11 from GF?

These issues are one reason so many experts play some form of transfer over the double. My preference is to use transfers starting with redouble (1♠ [x] xx is a 1N hand, 1N is clubs, etc.

The penalty redouble is not a big loss, imo, and not entirely lost anyway... pass followed by double shows a balanced or semi-balanced hand with no more than 2 spades and is penalty oriented.

Now we can show our club suit (or any other suit) over the double with whatever range we like. Opener makes his call at his next turn on the basis that responder has a weak 2 type of hand.. .and if responder is stronger, he bids again (or doubles, if the opps interfere and double makes sense as a 'do something intelligent' call.