If they have hearts, I'd like a diamond lead... but it's not clear that they have hearts. If they have clubs, I want to defend at the 3-level.
A 3D lead-directing call risks buying the contract in 3S, sometimes in cases where pard doesn't fit diamonds at ...
Let's suppose that a similar auction occurred:
Namely:
You are first to bid and it goes...
1S-(X)-2H...
Out-of-turn, doubler now asks what 2H means... at which point you realized that this is a good raise to 2S.
Doubler has asked about a bid out-of-turn... is this still ...
Partnership agreement to preempt w/ 5-card major factors in. Pard did not preempt - so 5 spades a bit less likely. Not mentioned in OP... so I guess that this inference is correct.
If the above is per OP's agreements... then it seems as if I'm more likely than ...
Just so... yet some sort of expert treatment/analysis of doubles is sorely lacking.
One may think that such-and-such is best following a double and subsequent competition... but agreements with partner are essential.
Moreover, the traditional treatment is that the raise - for better or worse - shows extras and invites game ...
4S for me - can win in numerous ways; tt these colors, will often propel opponents into 5D/5H.
3S begets an automatic 4H response... at which point, who knows? I prefer that the last guess is with the opposition.
Your remark seems to be in almost universal alignment w/ Bridgewinner agreements.
Yet, as an old-school bidder, this treatment is a bit foreign to me. I've a rather extensive bridge library... and every book I've read treats this raise as invitational to game showing extra values; yet the ...