cherdanno

Do you ever reconsider your opinion before making another posting supporting it? You do realize that opposite this hand, with ♥x ♦xx, you definitely don't want to be higher than 4♠? If you did, what was the point of your post?

Four trumps, great ♣K, good diamond suit and stiff heart. Not sure I could bring myself to PASS. I rather thought that I had awful 4 trumps (on a known 4-4 fit against heavy vulnerable preemption), my opening values consist in a stiff Q and a stiff K and a long suit that won't dream of having the entries to get stablished. A matter of semantics? :rolleyes:. I think my pass was right, but maybe I am wrong, await more opinions. Clear pass IMO.

Its not that simple. PASS here does not end the auction. So it is not a simple choice between bidding and defending 2♠. If partner has the two minor aces and out, then yes pass ends the auction.

So you score -100 in 4♥ instead of -140/-170 defending 2♠. If not doubled. You might not believe it, but I actually did know that - however, I will take my shot at them not doubling with no trump trick and no ace outside of the suit they preempted in. Do you really think defending 2♠ is a better MP spot than playing 4♥ on these cards, or did you just make this post to back up your original decision? Btw, kgr, your partner isn't close to a slam try (assuming you remember his hand right).

A 3♠ bid in this position shows a the values for a good 1♠-2♠ raise, e.g. 3-card support and 8 hcp. Responder's hand here is slightly too weak for that in playing strength, but only slightly. Then if you consider how often bidding 3♠ will be useful competitively (either because we get to play 3♠, or because partner can bid 4♠ over 4♥), and that this will happen a lot more often then partner's failing penalty double "because we promised defense", it seems obvious that slightly overbidding with 3♠ will win more often than lose.

Btw, one thing that stood out to me (in the bridgematters summary) that almost everybody is playing natural 1NT overcalls now.

I like to play COG cuebids, but here I would prefer to play 4♦ as good raise. With a COG you can bid...3♠! Now, partner's 4♦ cuebid in reply to 3♠ OTOH makes a lot of sense as COG, and if playing that, 3♠ would become more attractive. Lacking that agreement I would bid 4♥ - bidding 3N with these slow club tricks seems to gamble on a double diamond stopper, or on running hearts AND the club ace (or diamonds 7222 with LHO having no entry). Edit: Even if 4♦ in replay to 3♠ was COG, it seems still very wrong to bid 3♠. On most hands where we belong in spades rather than hearts, partner would have doubled.

The range for openings is s.th. like 11-21. The range of a simple overcall is s.th. like 7-19 for many. But even if your range is 8-18 (in which case you may run into other problems, e.g. by doubling with a 19 count and a singleton major), that's effectively a wider range than 11-21. If you make a 11-21 opening bid, most of your hands will fall into the 11-14 range. If you make an 8-18 overcall, most of your hands will fall into the 8-13 range, a considerably wider range. As for "senior citizens" having their values here, last time I checked Versace is a bit older than 30. So is Welland. Etc.

So you score -100 in 4♥ instead of -140/-170 defending 2♠.

I don't like double and 4♠ - I think we belong in 3N quite often (and in hearts some of the time).

Sorry should have realized you were thinking of responding rather than overcalling, pooltuna. I would overcall 3♥ in the problem situation, and I don't think it is close.

suspect it depends on agreements I would use 2NT as a sort of reverse Lebensohl where over partner's 3m bid I could make a NF 3♥ call. I would expect any 3 level call over 2♠ to be forcing What planet do you live on? Without special agreements 2NT is natural, and any 3-level bid is non-forcing.

On a club lead, declarer will just play safely by setting up 2 heart tricks, and make 3N=.

16-17 in Germany, 18-19 in the US.

You are right, one hand proves nothing. Here, for example, I expect +500 or +800 because my LHO had to show values and hit RHO with a minimum for his (possibly 4-card) overcall, but this doesn't prove opening was correct. Btw, some good players have problems after overcalling, too, because their overcalls have a pretty wide range - they don't know whether they are bidding constructively or destructively after all. And do you really think this hand is worth 9.8 points only?

Do you often raise partner's five-card suits with stiff ace in support? After a second look at the hand, yes.

Btw, I would think that making an SOS-XX with the West hand would be truly horrible bride. Does that matter at all, or should we believe West's claim "I would have redoubled", say even if he is a good player?

I changed my mind, I think there are reasonable hands for partner's bidding - s.th. like ♠A ♥AQx ♦KQJx ♠QJxxx.

I think a trump lead against 3♠X is automatic after this auction.

Does not exist, 3♠ was non-forcing.

Perfect. We discover our misfit at the two-level instead of the one-level. And won't be able to show our extra strength beyond the 3-level.

Yeah, that's why I posted this in this forum. I was trying to get at the question "absent any specific agreement otherwise (which would be alertable), what is the 'standard' meaning of this double?" If opponents are good, you can be almost certain that double is takeout. If opponents are bad, they probably don't know either :P

Wow there is a lot in this thread that I disagree with. A weak jump overcall opposite a passed hand can be stronger than 9 hcp, so there is no reason for North to assume that this isn't a partscore deal. If opponents have more strength, that makes the jump to 4♥ less dangerous, not more dangerous, as opponents probably have a game on. Whether that's enough of a reason to bid 4♥ rather than 3♥, I don't know, but I think we ought to start by considering the non-offending side's claim. (I would find it difficult to work out what North would really have done, given that he didn't notice what happened when he saw dummy.) Assuming 3♣ was game forcing, I expect East to double 4♥, and West to pass this. Finally, something I agree on: a forcing 3♣ also seems unexpected to me.

I hope you are still laughing as much after your partner scores up -200 against nothing at matchpoints, or -500 against their game, in his 2-1 fit.

The main difference is that a Polish 1♣ is forcing. That's something that you should be able to exploit. That's one difference. But also, the precision-style 2♣ opening makes having clubs in a Polish 1♣ hand much less likely.