overcalling

[navit]

In modern biddings how many cards in majors is needed to bid over minors and not to be confused with Take out doubles

 

1D© 1H (S)

 

 

minor over minor?

 

1C 1D

[ralph23]

♣♦♥♠

 

Your partner will expect 5+ (whether your overcall is major or minor), but at the one-level, you can overcall on a GOOD 4-card suit if your shape is not right for a takeout double. Say, AKJx, or even a little less.

 

Mike Lawrence treats the 4-card overcall in some depth in his book Overcalls. Despite this, some "advanced" players are still shocked when you make an overcall on a four-card suit. Well.... all I can say is, until they prove they are better than Mike Lawrence :lol: , I'm following his advice.

 

BTW, don't try this at the two-level.

[skjaeran]

I "routinely" make 1-level overcalls with only four with a good suit, opening strenght (or close to) and a distribution that makes a take out double impossible. Partner always expects a 5-bagger and bids on that assumption. So at times you end up playing with one trump less than you'd like. Since the trump suit is good and the strenght more than what I consider minimum overcall strenght, this normally leads to us ending in a playable spot.

[bid_em_up]

Well.... all I can say is, until they prove they are better than Mike Lawrence  :) , I'm following his advice.

Despite the "logic" of this statement (and I grant that it has some merit), I look at it slightly differently:

 

Unless you can prove that you (and your partner who is expecting at least 5 cards) are as good as Mike Lawrence, then you are better off reserving the major suit overcalls to the "standard" meanings, i.e. 5+ cards. B)

 

Btw, I love Mike's advice and those who follow it. It has substantially increased my usage of the low-level penalty double. :D

 

In response to the original posters question, in either case, the "norm" or standard is still that a 1 over 1 overcall promises a minimum of 5 cards in the suit bid. The fact that other people may overcall on 4 cards, or may recommend doing so, does not change the standard meaning of the bid.

[barmar]

Lawrence's recommendation includes the criteria that you should also be long in opener's suit. This way, it's likely that partner will be short and able to overruff LHO.

 

On the few occasions where I've made this type of overcall, partner inevitably competes to the 3 level, because he has 4-card support and shortness in opener's suit. It's scary during the auction, but in most cases it has been the right contract, despite violating the LOTT.

[SoTired]

Well.... all I can say is, until they prove they are better than Mike Lawrence  :) , I'm following his advice.

Despite the "logic" of this statement (and I grant that it has some merit), I look at it slightly differently:

 

Unless you can prove that you (and your partner who is expecting at least 5 cards) are as good as Mike Lawrence, then you are better off reserving the major suit overcalls to the "standard" meanings, i.e. 5+ cards. B)

I don't understand this comment. I have heard this nonsensical comment by others before in other situations. What difference does it make what playing strength the bidder is? Either the bid has merit or it does not. Kaplan (K-S) recommended weak NT. Does that mean if you are not as good as Kaplan, you should not play weak NT? Of course not!

 

It used to be common practice that 14 HCP was a mandatory opening and 13 HCP was an optional opening bid. Then some experts recommended opening lighter. Does that mean only experts should open lighter? Of course not! Opening bid strength is a function of whether it produces better results or not.

 

The same goes for 4-card overcalls. The current expert practice is: An overcall at the 1-level requires a 5-card suit. Advancer (the partner of the overcaller) should treat all overcalls as if they are 5-card suits. But occassionally overcaller may overcall at the 1-level on a 4-card suit if:

1) The suit is particularly strong,

2) The suit will make a good lead,

3) The hand strength is a full opening bid, and

4) The hand is unsuitable for a takeout dbl (This usually means you have length in opener's suit)

[han]

I never overcall with 3 or fewer, I sometimes overcall with 4. If I do then I have a good suit.

[Vilgan]

Unless you can prove that you (and your partner who is expecting at least 5 cards) are as good as Mike Lawrence, then you are better off reserving the major suit overcalls to the "standard" meanings, i.e. 5+ cards.  :)

Huh? Of what possible relevance can that be? Over calling a good 4 card suit has almost always been the correct choice for me, and there is no need to pretend to be at Mike's level. Saying you need to be a high level player who puts some time in to play something like relay precision might make sense, but a sensible general scheme like over calling a nice 4 card suit makes sense for anyone.

 

Besides, the 4-3 can frequently be the best place to play a game contract or... in rare circumstances... a slam contract (and pray for the 4-2 or better break :P).

 

Nothing new here I guess, was just astounded to see a comment like that in these forums.

 

Eric

[helene_t]

As for this rule that length in RHO's suit increases that chance of a fit: how strong is that correlation? If RHO opened a neboulous 1♣, club length raises the odds that RHO has short clubs and hence may have length in my suit. So the rule must be more reliable when considering a 1♠ overcall over 1♥ (assuming opps play 5-card majors). I'd like to see some statistics on this. No offense to anyone but I've seen too many statisticial urban legends in the bridge litterature to uncritically believe any "laws".

 

If nobody can point me to a statistical analysis, I'll make it myself, have some spare time tommorow evening :huh:

 

As for Lawrence versus the World (especially Larry Cohen): I think everybody would agree that when non-vulnerable, if RHO opens 1♦ and you hold

AKJ9

Ax

xxxx

Qxx

the correct call is 1♠. The issue is how far you take it. For Cohen, it has to be about as extreme as the above hand. Lawrence overcalls on 4-card when most players don't. I think

AJ9x

Ax

xxxx

Qxx

would be enough at matchpoints.

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

Mike Lawrence treats the 4-card overcall in some depth in his book Overcalls. Despite this, some "advanced" players are still shocked when you make an overcall on a four-card suit. Well.... all I can say is, until they prove they are better than Mike Lawrence :huh: , I'm following his advice.

 

BTW, don't try this at the two-level.

If you overcall on the 2 or 3 level with a 4 carder,

you just follow the advice of Marshall Miles B) .

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[the hog]

Totally agree with Harald's comment. Passing with say,

AKJ9

Ax

xxxx

Qxx

(The hand posted by Helene), is wimpy. Btw I would make this bid even without the heart Ace.

[Gerben42]

Totally agree with Harald's comment. Passing with say,

AKJ9

Ax

xxxx

Qxx

(The hand posted by Helene), is wimpy.

 

It's not wimpy, it's losing bridge. Yesterday's club night had a nice share of 4-3 fits, most of them tops for us, except for one where 3NT needed a miracle to get the same number of tricks as the 4♥ we were playing and got it.

 

Even 1♣ 1♦ may be 4 cards, what else would you bid with:

 

xxxx

Ax

AKJ9

Qxx

 

(same hand with suits mixed around)

[Quantumcat]

If you overcall on 4 card suits, if competition forces a reply from partner at a high level, might you not often end up in many 4-2 fits? Also, if you overcall with 4 card suits, will partner maybe reopen often when it's wrong (less hands you are forced to initially pass with)??

[ralph23]

If you overcall on 4 card suits, if competition forces a reply from partner at a high level, might you not often end up in many 4-2 fits? Also, if you overcall with 4 card suits, will partner maybe reopen often when it's wrong (less hands you are forced to initially pass with)??

Yes, of course. As I think everyone has stated (more or less), when you overcall your partner will expect 5+ cards. And indeed IMHO he is entited to. Sometimes that leads to a poor contract. So if it can cause poor results, why do it ?

 

Because (at least in Mike's opinion ;) ) the benefits to be derived are greater than the costs. Many if not most decisions on what-to-play are like this, after all. For instance, if you play Stayman you can no longer use 2♣ as a signoff to partner's 1NT opening. Isn't that bad ?

 

Yes of course, in some sense it is "bad" because it is a "cost" -- but there is virtually no free lunch. Every understanding has some cost in terms of what is surrendered. But the benefits of Stayman far outweigh the relatively small cost. You can make up many similar examples of what you give up e.g. playing transfers, or NMF, or Jacoby 2NT, or weak jump shifts, or whatever.

[Stephen Tu]

If you overcall on 4 card suits, if competition forces a reply from partner at a high level, might you not often end up in many 4-2 fits?

 

Not really 4-2 fits. 4-3, yes, but in those cases your side will have compensating high card strength, and that's most likely at the 2 level. Remember in this case, neither side is likely to have a fit so opps are less likely to want to bid high themselves, and more likely to bid NT, over which partner will be less inclined to support. And partner is unlikely to support on 2 except very occasionally at the 2 level.

 

The 4-2 fits tend to be played at the 1 level after it goes all pass. This isn't great but maybe you can scramble enough tricks to limit the damage, and maybe they are making something.

[SoTired]

If you overcall on 4 card suits, if competition forces a reply from partner at a high level, might you not often end up in many 4-2 fits? Also, if you overcall with 4 card suits, will partner maybe reopen often when it's wrong (less hands you are forced to initially pass with)??

I think these disasters occur more often not because of a 4-card suit overcall, but because a player with only 2-card support incorrectly raises competitively. So, usually, the bid was wrong even if the overcall was a 5-card suit; it was just a bigger disaster when the overcall turned out to be only 4 cards.

 

But sometimes your partner must bid and decides (correctly) that raising your suit with a doubleton is the best bid. So there are risks. But there are risks to passing, also (or making an offshape t/o dbl). Just because you defend does not mean you have avoided a disaster and holding an extra trump does not always save you from one.

 

When the whole thing boils down, experienced experts have discovered they get better results in the long run with an occassional 4-card overcall. I won't argue with them on this one.

[jtfanclub]

I think these disasters occur more often not because of a 4-card suit overcall, but because a player with only 2-card support incorrectly raises competitively.

Pfeh. On the auction 1♣-1♠-P, I'll raise with 2 card support and some shape (and no reasonable chance of game).

 

If our overcalls were 4 cards 1/4 of the time, and our raises were 2 cards 1/3 of the time (in fact, it's less on both).

 

About half the time we have 5+ across 3+.

About 42% of the time we have 5+ across 2.

And about 8% of the time, we have 4 across 2.

 

I suppose we get in trouble some times (I don't recall any offhand), but it's worth it to wreak havoc with the opponents. Good luck on trying to figure out whether you should leave it in!

[keylime]

I frequently overcall 4 card majors (and use 1NT as a t/o when appropriate) because of Miles' compelling counsel.

 

I hope to get his autograph and Sabine's autograph in Nashville! B)

[joshs]

A few comments on 4 card overcalls. In general the following factors are relevent:

a. Strength of the suit

b. Overall Strength (since a 5'th card is worth at least 1 trick, and often 2 tricks, you need that much values to make up for it.

c. Length in the opps suit. 4 card overcalls are most effective holding 4 cards in RHO suit (often can ruff that suit in summy if you catch a fit)

d. Nature of side cards. Playing in a 4-3 fit you often do not have much time to develop side tricks, so your side cards should be mostly ace's and kings. Side Quacks are a negative feature.

e. Holding in RHO's suit Holding Axxx or xxxx is ideal. Holding Quacks in RHO's suit are dreadful since they (usually) have defensive values and (usually) not offensive values.

f. Colors. In general, you always want to bid more (especially at mps) at W/W and be most conservative at R/R. When the opps are vul, just passively passing can get you 100 or 200 defending their contract.

 

But keep in mind, just because you make a mistake and bid 1 to many (say competing to 2 over 2 when you should have defended) doesn't mean that the opps might not occasionally bail you out and give you a bigger score. Busy bidding at low levels works more often than it should on a double dummy basis.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

joshs listed a very good outline of 4 card overcall style. If you use it with the correct hand types, it works very well.

 

To the players that worry about playing a 4-2 fit, how do they avoid a 5-0 fit after it goes overcall in a 5 card suit and all pass?

 

I foolishly overcalled a 3C openings holding 16HCP and AQ10xxx of spades, it went 'voice of thunder' DOUBLE and I went for 1,100 or 1,400 points. Should I give up overcalling with suits like AQ10xxx and 16HCP because my hand seemed to call for a 3S overcall?

 

Sam Stayman has a convention called Stayman that I use and I am not nearly as good as Sam Stayman. Why should I not adopt good bidding methods if they produce good results?

 

Standard bidding? Depends on the system and style. In England 4 card major openings are standard or at least very common. The Italian of decades past kept beating the rest of the world opening very weak 4 card majors. They also overcalled 4 card suits. Papi(an oldtime Italian great) CC lists 4 card overcalls and a very light overcall range. He stills plays against very strong pairs and still wins. :)

 

I actually feel much safer when I ovrcall with a strong 4 card suit, values in the opened suit and an opening bid(+) type hand. Overcalling a 5 card suit with the modern style of bid 'almost at every legal turn' is a much more dangerous style in my opinion.

 

Hi Quatumcat

 

Why is your partner raising a 4(5?) card overcall in competition at a high level holding 2 card support? Most(almost all?) good pairs play some version of card showing doubles at high levels in competition.

 

Miles and several of the Italian system books show numerous examples of four card overcalls(openings?) catching 4(5+?) card supoort and getting to contracts that other methods would be shut out of the bidding.

 

Regards,

Robert

[Elianna]

As for this rule that length in RHO's suit increases that chance of a fit: how strong is that correlation?

This is not the rule that people are claiming is true. The rule that people are claiming is "If I'm long in RHO's suit, there is a higher chance that partner is short in that suit".

 

There's this worry that if I have winner's/length in RHO's suit, maybe LHO has shortness and will be ruffing. But the hope is that partner (as dummy) will be overruffing.

[awm]

As for this rule that length in RHO's suit increases that chance of a fit: how strong is that correlation?

In fact I think it's a negative correlation.

 

If you give me the number of spades in my hand and RHO's hand, I can compute the probability distribution of partner's number of spades. The number of cards in other suits is not relevant.

 

So the only way my number of clubs effects partner's number of spades, is that it effects RHO's number of spades. The more clubs I have, the more likely RHO is balanced and has some spades. So more clubs for me implies more spades for RHO and less spades for partner. Note that this is only true because of the restriction that RHO has a 1♣ opening.

 

I agree with Elianna that the value in holding clubs when overcalling a four-card suit is that it increases the odds that partner has a useful ruffing value to go with his three trumps, not that it in any way makes partner more likely to have three trumps.

[goobers]

I don't understand why people are raising with 2 card support

[joshs]

I don't understand why people are raising with 2 card support

Ok, LHO opens 1H

Partner overcalls 1S

3'rd hand passes

And you have Qx xxx Axxx KJxx

 

Sadly you can not make a responsive x of partners bid.

 

You also have a 10 count with a good fitting honor, but you lack a 5 card suit to bid and lack anything that resembles a stopper for NT. I think a 2S bid would be nearly unananimous in a bidding panel here (you have some extra values to make up for the lack of a 3rd trump).

[joshs]

As for this rule that length in RHO's suit increases that chance of a fit: how strong is that correlation?

In fact I think it's a negative correlation.

 

If you give me the number of spades in my hand and RHO's hand, I can compute the probability distribution of partner's number of spades. The number of cards in other suits is not relevant.

 

So the only way my number of clubs effects partner's number of spades, is that it effects RHO's number of spades. The more clubs I have, the more likely RHO is balanced and has some spades. So more clubs for me implies more spades for RHO and less spades for partner. Note that this is only true because of the restriction that RHO has a 1♣ opening.

 

I agree with Elianna that the value in holding clubs when overcalling a four-card suit is that it increases the odds that partner has a useful ruffing value to go with his three trumps, not that it in any way makes partner more likely to have three trumps.

Its not just that partner will have shortage. Its that partner will have well placed shortage (shortage that can't be overruffed).

 

If you have 4C and 4S, AND RHO opens 1C, and partner raises there is an increased likelyhood that partner's shortage is Clubs (which probably can't be over ruffed). Furthermore, you had a doubelton in a red suit. Unless partner has 5 or more in that suit, its very unlikely that your LHO can over ruff you. This makes playing a 4-3 fit very effective. So when this is the situation, the opps almost have to lead trumps, and that surrenders the tempo to you, and means that they can't force you.