[JonnyQuest]

1♣ - (1♦) - X The double shows both Majors, yes? Standard stuff?

But....what about:

1♣ - (2♦) - X Still BOTH Majors?

If:

1♣ - (2♦) - 2♠ ******* What is 2♠ here? Does it promise a 5 card suit?

[Zelandakh]

After a (weak) jump overcall, you just do not have enough bidding space to restrict double to being only both majors. It has to cover a wider range of hands than this. The 2♠ response shows 5+ spades and is forcing.

[GreenMan]

Zelandakh, on 2013-June-05, 01:57, said:

After a (weak) jump overcall, you just do not have enough bidding space to restrict double to being only both majors. It has to cover a wider range of hands than this. The 2♠ response shows 5+ spades and is forcing.

Indeed. This is a good example of a time when you have to make the call that misdescribes your hand the least. There are lots of others. Also an example of how your own pre-empt can force the opps to make choices they'd rather not have to.

[awm]

Double of 2♦ is either:

1. At least 4-3 majors less than invite.
2. One or both 4M with inv+ values.

The first hand will pass simple rebids from opener. The second will take a second call (typically notrump or clubs or cue if opener bids the major where we do not have four).

[TWO4BRIDGE]

How often do you have 4-4 in the Majors in those situations ?
I have posted this non-standard treatment before:

-- Neg-DBL shows shows 4 cards ♠ and says nada about ♥.

-- Bidding ♥ shows 4+ cards

-- Bidding ♠ shows 5+ cards.

[wangzhi123]

i use bid double 44 major！and 1h 1s 4+ indicate the opening head and constuctive！
double 44 major or single suit 17p+
y，five good suit

[Zelandakh]

wangzhi123, on 2013-June-09, 12:42, said:

i use bid double 44 major！and 1h 1s 4+ indicate the opening head and constuctive！
double 44 major or single suit 17p+

This sounds like the perfect system... providing the opps are banned from calling the TD.

[fromageGB]

Zelandakh, on 2013-June-10, 03:33, said:

This sounds like the perfect system... providing the opps are banned from calling the TD.

Allow me to translate :
1♣ - (1♦) - X The double shows both Majors, yes?
. . Yes, 4-4 both majors. (1♥ and 1♠ would be 4 card)
1♣ - (2♦) - X Still BOTH Majors?
. . Yes, assume 4-4 both majors, but it could also be 17+ hcp with an unspecified long suit.
1♣ - (2♦) - 2♠ ******* What is 2♠ here? Does it promise a 5 card suit?
. . Yes

Perfectly normal where I live.

[Cyberyeti]

fromageGB, on 2013-June-28, 10:06, said:

Allow me to translate :
1♣ - (1♦) - X The double shows both Majors, yes?
. . Yes, 4-4 both majors. (1♥ and 1♠ would be 4 card)
1♣ - (2♦) - X Still BOTH Majors?
. . Yes, assume 4-4 both majors, but it could also be 17+ hcp with an unspecified long suit.
1♣ - (2♦) - 2♠ ******* What is 2♠ here? Does it promise a 5 card suit?
. . Yes

Perfectly normal where I live.

So what do you do with a 9-11 count 4-2 in the majors without a diamond stop ? say AQxx, Kx, xxxx, Jxx particularly opposite a maybe short club.

Edit: - over 2♦, not 1, and what does opener do with 4225/2425.

[fromageGB]

Cyberyeti, on 2013-June-28, 10:19, said:

So what do you do with a 9-11 count 4-2 in the majors without a diamond stop ? say AQxx, Kx, xxxx, Jxx particularly opposite a maybe short club.

Playing with a random pick-up partner, 1♠. As the poster said, constructive.
Not my methods, and twoforbridge's post seems a better method. Is it standard, though? I am not aware of it.

Edit - I am not espousing any method, just offering my interpretation of the post. Personally I would bid 1♥ to show spades.

[Cyberyeti]

fromageGB, on 2013-June-28, 10:36, said:

Playing with a random pick-up partner, 1♠. As the poster said, constructive.
Not my methods, and twoforbridge's post seems a better method. Is it standard, though? I am not aware of it.

Edit - I am not espousing any method, just offering my interpretation of the post. Personally I would bid 1♥ to show spades.

Sorry, should have specified, over 2♦.

[blackshoe]

I don't know if it's considered standard, but I do know that Marty Bergen is pretty emphatic that a negative double only shows both majors in the specific auction 1♣-(1♦)-X.

[ArtK78]

blackshoe, on 2013-June-28, 18:44, said:

I don't know if it's considered standard, but I do know that Marty Bergen is pretty emphatic that a negative double only shows both majors in the specific auction 1♣-(1♦)-X.

I consider this to be standard.