[ASkolnick]

However, I believe when I play with a partner of mine, he would say this is takeout. But we have the implicit agreement that these types of doubles are takeout. But since 1m-P-2m-2M, pass is forcing, so partner can strive to reopen with a double.

I don't particularly like it, but I tend to acquiesce because what happens when the auction continues

1m-P-2m-2H-
P-2S

Now was I sitting, did they find a fit, partner does not really know where I stand.

[catatonic]

how can it be correct to play this as penalty ?
pass has to be forcing , and if I have a suitable hand to penalty double, LHO and pt are short , hence pt can reopen with a double if not unbalanced , making a penalty double the best contract

so double should therefore show a hand which has better than minimum values but not well stopped in H or not strong enough for 3NT

[cherdano]

mikeh, on Sep 4 2008, 05:53 PM, said:

penalty

I can't see the upside of any other treatment, given that we know that responder isn't making a pure penalty double when we pass, and that pass by us is forcing...

I can certainly see the upside of playing 2/3-doubles in this auction.
I don't see the merits of "cards" or "extras" in this auction.

[P_Marlowe]

catatonic, on Sep 5 2008, 04:04 PM, said:

how can it be correct to play this as penalty ?
pass has to be forcing , and if I have a suitable hand to penalty  double, ... <snip>

The standard agreement is, that if pass is forcing,
a direct double is penalty, i.e. if you have a hand
suitable for a penalty double, you double.

You may of course change the meaning of the double,
but double = penalty, assuming you are in a FP
sequence, is standard.

with kind regards
Marlowe