Bende

I think it was because when they bid your suit there are quite many hands which would consider a penalty double but in the vast majority of cases, overcaller's partner will bid something and then my partner won't know much about my hand or if we should double their run out suit. Perhaps dbl could show 17-19 balanced and a penalty, so partner can assume more defensive values in my hand if they run to something new.

This is the auction I meant: 1♣ - (pass) - 1♥ - (1♠) 1♣ = natural 11+ or balanced 11-13 or 17-19 1♥ = 4+♠ My comment regarding support redoubles was that there has been no double, thus redoubles does not apply here. Yes, it is possible to play support doubles. It seems like a strange situation for support doubles but maybe it makes sense. That's what I meant to ask in my previous post.

Support xx is quite difficult when they bid your suit. I thought about playing support x, but is there much point when RHO most likely has a five card suit?

We play 1♣ = natural or balanced and then use transfer responses. It is not extremely uncommon that the opponents bid our suit i fourth position, usually without asking what the alerted transfer bid meant. 1♣ - (pass) - 1♦ - (1♥) 1♣ - (pass) - 1♥ - (1♠) We used to play penalty doubles in this position (because of a meta agreement stating that if opponents try to play in our suit, double is for penalties). This hasn't worked out very well. Does anyone else have specific agreements in this situation? If it matters, without interference we accept the transfer with minimum and 2-3 cards in partners suit and jump to 2M with minimum and 4 card support.

Do you have a suggested defense against a weak (say 4-9) 2♣ opening showing 4♥ and an unspecified 5+ minor? The heart suit can be xxxx but the minor suit is normally descent. The bid is in practice quite often passed by responder. Currently I play dbl=13-15 balanced or 17+ (Lebensohl is used) and 2NT=16-18. Other bids (including 2♥) is natural.

Won't this type of reasoning lead to all sorts of strange situations? It seems to say that if partner thinks before following with a low club I have UI and if he doesn't I also have UI. Perhaps the word "experience" in this sentence means that partner better learn to play in tempo to stop causing these problems.

If 4♣ can be a singleton then I would think 5♣ shows the ace. Otherwise, I don't know.

In one strong club system, 1M shows a 4+suit, possibly with a longer minor, and 1♦ is used to show an unbalanced hand with either minor. How should one defend against this opening? It would be possible to use a defense similar to that one uses against a common nebulous diamond but it doesn't seem to be the most effective. Specifically, using 2NT to show both minors is probably a bad idea.

I play 1♦ - 1♥; 1♠ = 4+♠ 1NT = 4+♣ 2♣ = 6+♦, 11-14 without heart support or 18+ with either a) 6+♦ or b) 5♦-3♥ 2♦ = 6+♦, 15-17 2♥ = 11-14, can be 3-card support 2♠ = 6+♦-4♠, reverse strength 2NT = 4♥, 15+; now 3♣ from responder is Jacoby and 3♦ is invite to 4♥ 3♣ = 5♦-5♣, game force 3♦ = 6♦-3♥, 14-17 3♥ = 4♥, mediumish but can be minimum with nice honors 1♦ - 1♠; 1NT = 4+♣ 2♣ = 6+♦, 11-17 or strong as before (also including 18+ with 4♥) 2♦ = 11-15, 5+♦-4♥ 2♥ = 5+♦-4♥, 15-17-ish 2♠+ = as before

When we play 2 way nmf this is how we do it 1♥ - 1♠; 1NT - 3♦ = 4♠-5+♦ invitational 1♥ - 1♠; 1NT - 2♣; 2♦ - 3♦ = 5♠-5♦, invitational

What is the meaning of 2NT in this sequence? (1♠) - 2♦ - (2♠) - pass; (pass) - 2NT Is it natural? Does it show a non specific side suit? Does it show a specific side suit? If it does show a specific side suit, which? An argument can be made for clubs, since with hearts one can double. If 2NT shows clubs, what does 3♣ show? An argument can also be made for hearts, since with clubs one can just bid 3♣. If 2NT shows hearts, what does dbl show? If it makes any difference, I am assuming that a direct 2♠ shows a two suiter with hearts and a minor and good suits (i.e. not good-bad two suiter).

That's sounds very similar, and it could very well be the "solution" that it is simply not possible to invite with a minor when the opponents interfere with 2M.

In Garozzo's system Ambra, he uses Rubensohl transfers after interference over 1♣, which shows 2+♣. However, there is one thing that seems strange and that I don't quite understand. Perhaps someone on this forum can help. It goes something like this: 1♣ - (2x) - dbl = takeout 2y = weak 2NT+ = transfer Transfer to a suit shows 5+ and inv+ if the suit could be shown on the 2-level, otherwise it is weak or strong (opener accepts the transfer and responder bids on with game forcing values). Transfer to opps suit is Staymanish and asking for stop. Opener accepts the transfer without a stop but otherwise bid some descriptive bid. There is an exception when opponents bid spades, in case 3♥ is an invitational hand while 3♠ shows a game forcing balanced hand with exactly 4♥. So far so good. Let's say that the opponents interfere with 2♦: 1♣ - (2♦) - dbl = takeout, can be invitational with a club suit 2♥♠ = weak 2NT = clubs, weak or strong ... That dbl can contain an invitational hand with clubs is not too bad, since opener will likely bid 2 of a major (unless fourth hand preempts) and 3♣ from responder will then show a suit and values. Now, if opponents interfere with 2♥: 1♣ - (2♥) - dbl = takeout, can be invitational with a either minor (not specified explicitly in Ambra) 2♠ = weak 2NT = clubs, weak or strong 3♣ = diamonds, weak or strong ... This is slightly more awkward, since if opener does not have spades, he might bid 3♦ with for example 3343, x44x or even for example 3352 if 1♣ contains all balanced hands without 5M. If it turns out that responder has an invitational hand with clubs, he is pretty much stuck, isn't he? Interference with 2♠ causes the same problem if responder has an invitational hand with a minor (not if responer has hearts, because the system covers that by using two bids, 3♦ and 3♥, to differentiate between different strengths). I feel I must be missing something, but I am not sure how this is suppoosed to work.

1♦ - 1♥; 2♥ - 2NT (forcing); 3♠ - 4♠; pass

I play 2M = 10-13 to I open 2♠.

1. Spade stopper 2. No spade stopper 3. Slam invitational with diamonds 4. Invitational 5. Slam invitational in the bid minor

Does there have to be safety in 2NT? Perhaps the playing thinks 2sp might make (which in an imps game will be expensive) and that 2NT, although it probably won't make, is the least expensive contract available?

When defending against artificial weak two bids, like 2♦-multi for example, it is quite common to play double as a balanced hand. The strength of the double is usually either 13-15 (or very strong hands) or 15+. On Chris Ryall's website 13-15 balanced is recommended against the multi, but 15+ balanced is recommended against 2♦ = 4+♥-4+♠ and against Flannery. What is the reasoning behind the different ranges? If our opponents play for example 2♣ = 4♥-5+m, does it make sense to use dbl = 13-15 balanced (or strong) or dbl = 15+ balanced?

Does anyone know how much has been updated in the 2nd edition of "The Complete Book on Overcalls in Contract Bridge" and whether it is worth getting the new edition? Tobias

Against 2♦ = 4+♠/4+♥, we play dbl = 15+ balanced 2♥ = natural 2♠ = natural 2NT = takeout for minors 2♦-P-2♥-DBL = balanced 2♦-P-2♥-P, P-DBL = takeout 2♦-P-2♥-P, P-2NT = weaker takeout for the minors 2♦-P-P- is perhaps more tricky. dbl = takeout 2♥ = natural 2♠ = natural 2NT = natural?

i understand that with 5C4D, most open 1D intending to rebid 2C (assuming you hand is not suitable to rebid 2C, nor strong enough to reverse) you said that with 5332 diamonds you open 1D and over 1M you rebid 1NT to show that but what if you are, say 1453 you open 1D, partner responds 1S? don't you rebid 1NT too? or you rebid 2D? It has become more common among skilled pairs in Sweden to play 5542 with all balanced hands outside the NT range in 1♣. The way it is most often played: * 5♦332 is opened 1♣ (but 5M332 is opened 1M) * xx45 is opened 1♣ * After 1♦-1M transfers are used, so openers rebid of 1NT shows clubs * With 1453 after 1♦-1♠ opener can rebid 2♦ to show 4♥-5+♦ and minimum

I thought it would be interesting to hear what the sequence 1♣-1♦; 1♥-1♠; 1NT-2♣ means in your different systems. In ours, it means invitational values with 44 in the majors and at least 3 clubs. Opener has shown 11-13 balanced without a four card major.

I bid 4♣ = 5+♣-4+♦, gameforcing.

I would bid 1NT. If 2NT would be natural (I play it as spade support) then I might bid that.

Misunderstandings? Do you mean if double is for penalties or not?