sfbp

3♦ - all day, every day and on the Queen's official birthday, to name but a few. Once you have got used to bidding up powerful hands when you have no more than 15 points, it becomes a case of "points, schmoints". Why DO 2/1 players always have MORE of everything? The rest of us manage quite fine. Stephen

Just because you posted it, I imagine there's a catch. I lead a heart (actually I lead the middle one but you dont allow for that). Who knows, but I now have a rule that says when this happens, lead the major they bid. Probably wrong in this case but what the heck, a lead is a lead. I recently got nailed by a pro playing with a client by something looking a bit like your question. J654 QJ42 J7 T53 Bidding 1H(client) P(me) 1S(pro) P(partner) 1NT P 3NT end The pro had two small spades and a 15 count. I should have led my spades.

Btw how many times do I have to point out that I never needed or wanted to post my own action on the hand as evidence of anything? It worked out, but it didn't work out. What could be fairer than that...... But the flame merchants couldn't see anything other than their own single-minded determination to find a mistake made by the poster. I don't care what they think of my scummy 2♥ bid, but to attack me personally when I wouldn't repent of it is merely childish.

Phil, i think the point I was trying to make is "how many points are there left over after someone opens 2♣?" Mind you, if I had a PP for everyone who had knowingly overcalled my precision 1♣ opener without their partner alerting that they may have nothing, I'd be rich. I don't believe I've ever heard such an alert being given over 2♣ (strong). Would you, for instance feel obliged to alert when partner overcalls 4♠ on a normal opener with "pd may have a strong hand"? I'd be happy to discuss this with you in another thread, perhaps, since I sincerely hope someone shuts this one down after the nastiness just posted.

So: LHO opp opens 2♣, and partner calls a natural 2♥. You want me to alert this too, I suppose, as being very weak?

I'm never buying the auction in clubs, so unless partner has a constructive or destructive raise in spades, I'm in trouble to make game. 3♠ for me. I've had lots of luck opening wild hands like 7-5 in hearts and clubs with a 3-bid. Why shouldnt this extend to a bad 6-6? There's no reason to suppose that my spades are taking tricks in defence (yet), so I may as well tell the main point of my hand. There are a lot of honour cards out there for partner to hold, and a lot of club losers. I'll gamble he has some of the former but not enough to help the latter. If he's got nothing, I force the bad guys to start bidding at the 4-level. I sincerely doubt the auction will die. I might even make another bid (horror of horrors if partner shows some values). I've seen highly successful 3-level preempts by others on a lot more than this. Not my style, but didn't someone say the secret to real 3-level preemption is to vary your bids fairly widely?

Was he talking about a raise by responder, or by advancer?

I never thought I'd get this far into defending my action of 2♥ since everyone else seems to have roundly condemned it. Remember my purpose was to ask about the 1♥ overcall vs double. But here is what flashed through the mind of the condemned man as he sat waiting for execution: a. with my holding in spades, opps are surely going to a minor suit or a notrump game. Thus, I force them to bid at the three level. b. by raising hearts, I do encourage partner to lead them against 3NT which is probably a Good Thing - I wouldn't want to have to double 3N to convince him. c. It is at least a LAWful raise (Law of Total Tricks and corollaries thereto) d. it's conceivable partner may compete - I only hope he doesn't do so without SIX hearts e. it's inconceivable that he could raise to game after a simple overcall, both opps bidding, and a single raise. As you can tell, e. was wrong, and I was (initially) furious that he could have so much for his 1♥ bid. I was less furious when I discovered the 4♥ contract was cold - after all I only want to win, and there's no point in getting upset over partner's dummy play.

I wasn't trying to justify my reasoning for bidding or I would have talked up the nice values in my hand. Seriously. This was about the 2 issues to my mind: a. Is it really ok to bid 1♥ on 19 (at the time I thought not but when I saw how 4♥ should make and the insistence of 2/3 here that its a 1♥ overcall... well you know the rest) b. Is it ok to bid (both fit and non-fit bids) in 4th seat if partner is sure you cannot have more than 8 (THAT agreement we did, and do, have)? After all a non-fit bid in this seat can hardly make game opposite a std overcall, since 16+8 = 24. Once I got over the fact that partner had failed to make 4♥ I was more concerned that bidding 1♥ on this type of hand might expose me to missing game on some good 6 and 7 counts at some later session. I ended up invoking Skid to point out that my Qx of clubs was far from worthless. At least it was in the unbid suit. Qx of spades would have made my hand worth negative points, almost.

Ironically, it would seem to make sense that if overcaller can have up to 19 then advancer might want to bid on about 3 points less than usual, which is what (quite by accident it seems, as noone can find any other justification) I did. So your point is that there should not be absolute standards for either seat but only that one partner must allow for the possibility of the stronger (or weaker) hand. I agree. I'd hate to give up 7-point overcalls though.

Have you tried running this contract through Deep Finesse or GIB? Perhaps you should engage brain before putting mouth in gear. I am not proud of the cold game reached. However the majority conclusion that 1♥ is right on partner's hand seems not to vitiate my strange bid of 2♥, but in the circumstances to reinforce it. Perhaps this should lead us to reevaluate our strategies - but no, I forgot, you know best always. Have a nice trip (don't fall toooo far).

Ah, so it's a simple play for 4 hearts is it? Too bad my overbid caused it :P

Are you incapable of making a direct statement? Apples and oranges generally don't feature in my bidding box, Josh. Looks like they might be a welcome addition to your Hainanese Chicken Rice, though.

I don't see why :P If you recall he suggests bidding 7♠ on [hv=s=sxxxhkxdxxxxcxxxx]133|100|[/hv] Even you, Han, can see the elements of similarity to the hand I held. Advancers of the world unite!

Quite so! Full marks Dr. D. [hv=d=e&v=n&n=sjhak832dakt3ckj3&w=sa98hqj4dq954ca52&e=skq72h65dj8ct9876&s=st6543ht97d762cq4]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

More rubbish! I was pleased with the auction as evidence I made a reasonable bid. It's perfectly possible to bid a 18 point game with no suit longer than 5 and no voids - and no competition to help the partnership evaluate, either. However my surprise at landing in a makeable contract has nothing to do with my surprise at partner going outside what I consider the parameters for overcalling. Furthermore, despite your comments, I do not believe that there is a overall difference between Europe and USA on this issue. Foremost in the 1♥ camp were some European and Australian players. Some of those on my side of the debate are conservative players from North America. I consider 1♥ a "blame transfer". If it doesn't work out, you can always blame partner. Especially if he overbids his hand after a negative double :P

Well - the contract doesn't depend on the lead at all. However the lead was the ♠K A small ♣ from hand at trick 2 and RHO takes the Q with the Ace and returns a ♠. Good luck!

I'm not in the least pissy. But as usual the piss-artists focused on the one error they could see - my bid, which wasnt even the subject of my original post. As you recall, the "error" I made should have led to a good result (except that partner misplayed the hand - tant pis). I'm not patronizing anyone Richard - however I find your remarks contemptuous and worthy of contempt. I never asked for help with my bidding. I asked what PARTNER should bid with his 19-point hand. The question is: can we honestly justify having such a wide range for overcalls? More to the point, is there any need to? As to your point about imprecision, I'd say that 7-19 is much more imprecise than a nice courtesy raise guaranteed to be less than 9 HCP. The bid I referred to makes you sound like the Unlucky Expert - especially since you obviously haven't read the book - at least in a while. Take a look at the section following page 58. The chapter is about "the points you lose bidding" and the section in question "Underbidding of small hands". Sneer all you want, this is one of the greatest books ever written on Bridge, and his other opus, Design for Bidding, a close second. Bah Humbug!

You can run a mitchell with 4 pairs as a team event. This might be a nice addition to the current team events where you don't get to meet the other opponents. The biggest problem with 4-pair mitchells is that you need the pairs to sign up in the right order (or tolerate random teammates). This could be solved in software.

Hmmm - you are way behind the times Ron. Wasn't it S.J. Simon who first put in print (in the late 40's) the concept of hand evaluation not being related to high card strength, but being an elastic thing depending on things like fit. Simon's famous example was that you should bid a GS on the strength of a 3-point hand, one honour card, the King of ♥, if I am not mistaken. Don't you routinely raise partner after his 1♠ opener was doubled on Qxx xxxx xx xxxx? Funny, I never thought of the Hog as a timid bidder......... (well, make that Qxxx xxxx xx xxx if you are a 4-card majorite). I mean, if I believe you could have 19 points, I definitely should raise to a mere 2 on this "pile of junk" or "piece of cheese" as someone called it. How else do we get to a making 21-point game??????? But this wasnt about that - it was about the concept that I dont much like the idea that "just an overcall" (Barry Crane's phrase) can be as wide a range as 7-19. Well my ♣Q turned out to be pretty useful. Maybe instead of ranting about this you and the other bright sparks here should be trying to figure out how to make 4♥ :P Cheers, Stephen

Well, that's one reason it might be smart for him to X to begin with :huh: The observation about XX on 9 points is entirely in accord with the idea that there are only 40 points in the deck. Advancer generally has very little. 9 is (by advancer standards) a LOT. So a. he KNOWS that I have a max of 8 b. he knows that I know he will X on 17 or more (well as of a couple of days ago we are mostly agreed on this point) Pointwise it only gets tricky when he has 17 and and I have 6 +/- 2. As you say, once everyone is bidding, we can reevaluate somewhat, especially in the light of a fit, which on this hand is what the 2♥ bid reveals. I would have been delighted to pass 3♥. Only question is with what you and I consider a maximum overcall (say 16) and I have the same 2, are we already too high? But now opponents have a little more and they may bid. As I pointed out above, second (and/or third) actions by the overcaller are extremely unusual. Let's hear it for bidding up bad hands in advancer's seat!

I am unrepentant. I don't think my 2 point raise is any worse than pard's 19 point overcall. They both stretch the parameters by about 2HCP. I mean what happens if I pass? They play in 1S or 1NT down 1, undoubled and even doubled then that's only 100. And what is partner to do now? The concession by Hannie that he would bid 1H on both extremes tells me that there's no way to bid the strong hand after a pass of the negdbl. I mean now HE's the one sticking his neck out to bid again, even with 19 points. Bidding is all about fit and shape (points schmoints), and you can't have it both ways. Either 1♥ is right and 2♥ is right, or they are both wrong. Of course I am bidding 1♠ over double, but over X,1♠ (by RHO) i will peacefully pass (and wait for pard to get into trouble). Funny thing is: 1H seems to be the only way to get us to our game-making fit. Very odd. But I would still rather (at matchpoints) partner passed 2♥ and made 4 than bid 4♥ and made 2. I think the agreements I assumed were reasonable, and my bid within the range of those agreements (just). I see pard's point, but I rather WISH he had doubled, not because it gets us a better score (it clearly doesnt) but for my sanity.

Ah, but if you eat creme brulee you'll never get one Hainanese Chicken Rice.... no wonder

Geez, why would I discuss BRBR with you after your previous disbelief of the most basic 2+2=4 Josh? Better to keep it to myself and make a profit.

More like 0-8. Research shows (shhh don't tell mom!) that XX on any 9 count is pretty profitable. The point of the post was not to highlight my superaggressive (and I'm sure the tone of some commentators indicate they thought it was suicidal) 2♥ bid, but to question whether ANY partnership should have to cope with 7-19 overcalls. Into a pint pot putteth ye not a quart (ancient wisdom inscribed on a church in Baltimore dated 1692)