Posted 2017-January-29, 10:54
It's an interesting point as to what X means - I was thinking it should be "values with no clear direction" as SteveMoe suggested, but 2H could also show that. Perhaps 2H should deny 4S and X shows 4S? A penalty double must be pretty rare, seeing as you would often overcall 2D initially if you had a good 5-card suit; and they'll probably just run to 2H anyway. (Perhaps xxx A10x AJ10x Kxx?)
Having a had a look through my copy of Lawrence's book on balancing, I suspect playing 2NT as natural here would be a better system; and if so, 2NT is actually, I think, probably the best description of this hand even though you'd like a touch more.
Anyway, partner held something like ♠AQxx ♥Qx ♦xxx ♣Qxxx and competed all the way to 3S... which opps misdefended slightly to let through. Opener was 2551, and so whilst we could have had 100 or 300 from 3HX, I said to partner that I wasn't going to risk doubling as it might make if declarer did have 6-5 as in wank's theoretical layout. Three people did double 3H though and collected 100, 300 and 500.
ahydra