Brian, would like to take that theory one more step. Using this example....1 -(p)-1 -(2 )
Penalty System with interference and balanced hands with no trump support for partners bid.
pass is gamma
double is either penalty or HoC (openers hand is balanced good strength, medium strength TBD (16-21), no more than 2 's, )
2NT is alpha in suit below
3NT balanced strong strength, strength TBD (22+) and again no more than 2 's, possible slam (can use stayman ?)
Note: Without interference than 2NT would be normal HoC
I still don't really like it, Jim, as you're making responder guess opener's hand. Either/or doubles are a pet hate of mine if it means a guess of whether to pass it out or not. The cynic in me calls them "blame transfer doubles", in other words you can double on a wide range of hands and then blame partner when they guess wrong. Two-way doubles are fine if they're forcing in any event, or if the action taken depends on the responder's own hand rather than the doubler's hand.
I'm not saying that your scheme is unplayable, just that I personally don't like it.
Really appreciate the responses.
Yes, there is "some" guessing on the part of responder. Opener's double (over interference) better defines his/her distribution and limits the HCP's. And in this case (as you indicated), "the action taken depends on the responder's own hand rather than the doubler's hand", since opener is better defining the hand. The proposal is that a double (over interference) shows balanced hand with HCP limit and is either convertible or HoC.
The technique does tell responder two things, openers hand is 'balanced" and capped at 16-19/20/21 HCP's depending on the partnership agreement. Responder has a better feel for whether or not slam is possible and can estimate the penalty potential (Vul vs NVul). Note: There is also potential for responder to bid 2NT and that would set up a whole different sequence.
The 3NT bid indicates a balanced hand with 20/21/22+ HCP's (again depending on partnership agreement) and responder can proceed if she/he thinks game is better or slam is possible.
Also, IMO this technique of two-way double with interference (Penalty or HoC) should "not" be used when opener has a distributional hand.