Try for slam?

[cherdano]

Red vs white, IMPs.

♠AQ8653 ♥J7 ♦KT ♣A63

(1♥) 1♠ (4♥)

 

You are partnering an aggressive overcaller (i.e. me). Do you or don't you?

[ralph23]

I don't. Just seems too unlikely....

[P_Marlowe]

No.

 

It is not even clear, if 5S is a try, most likely it is,

but why not either bid 4NT or 5H, in case you are

trying for slam?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Halo]

5S

 

Can't just let them bid us out of a slam on nothing. Sure we can go off when partner has <2 heart losers, but this is an unusual hand and we should go for it.

[mike777]

Red vs white, IMPs.

♠AQ8653 ♥J7 ♦KT ♣A63

(1♥) 1♠ (4♥)

 

You are partnering an aggressive overcaller (i.e. me). Do you or don't you?

4s

tough

 

I finally fall back on Bergen rule and just give up on slam after my lho has opened at the one level.

[jdonn]

By my interpretation of what an 'aggressive overcaller' is, I bid 4♠ and am glad if it makes.

[Robert]

Hi cherdono

 

Didn't you just post about the methods that were played after one of your 5/6+HCP overcalls. I am hoping that you do not go for a number. since my raise might well be a bit thin considering your overcall style. If you have bid 1S on KJxxx and a side Queen or Jack, we might too high at 4Ss.

 

Regards,

Robert

[jdeegan]

:( This is a great problem hand, imo. I won't presume to offer this forum a bridge lesson, but I am not reading replies that address what seems to me to be the major issue on what could be a key swing hand in the match - i.e. what are the opponents likely to do?

 

LOTT suggests the hand has lots of tricks - 11♠ + 10♥ + one void = 22 tricks looks about right, but anything between 20 and 24 is possible. It strikes me that even very good non-vul opponents will be tempted to bid 'one more for safety'.

 

If I bid 4♠, it is VERY likely our side will get a chance to act over 5♥. If I bid 5♠, it will not only invite slam, but it will put pressure on the opponents.

 

Who were the opponents? What was the state of the match? Was table feel a factor? All these things seem so important as to be controlling.

[Guest Jlall]

Bidding beyond the 4 level at this point is nuts imo

[benlessard]

[hv=v=n&s=saq8653hj7dktca63]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

My first thought are

 

ive got AQ8xxx its very likely my pd has only 5s to KJTxx

RHO jumped to 4♥ so they are in a 10 card fit or hes got 4♥ and a ♠void but partner is likely to have a ♥stiff.

 

so imho

Here are possible minimum IMPs red agressive overcall

 

KJTxx      5 is safe

x

Axx

Qxxx

 

KJTxx      5 inst fun but can make make

Q

xx

KQJx

 

KJTxx      6 will make but partner wont bid it

x

AQJx

xxx

 

KJTxx      5 is safe

x

QJxx

KJx

 

 

KJTxxx      5 will go down

A

xxx

Kxx

 

KJTxx      6 will make

X

AQxxx

xx

 

KJTxx      5 is safe

x

Ax

QJxxx

 

The problem i see is that partner is unlikely to have a finesse over the opener.

If partner doesnt have the ♦A♦ my ♦king♦ inst great. And if partner has the ♣QJ♣ instead of the ♣K♣ the king is probably offside. These hand show that slam is unlikely but going down in 5 also. Partner is more likely to have ♥void♥ then ♥xx♥ but he could have a stiff ♥K or Q♥ however.

 

So my bid is 5♠ as long as my partner knows what an IMPs red overcall without ♠AQ♠ looks like.

[ArtK78]

A friend of mine has a saying, "When you are fixed, stay fixed!"

 

4S is a clear call. Anything else is a shot in the dark.

[keylime]

Crane said to avoid the odd levels. Sound counsel on this hand.

 

He also said to never play pard for the right hand. More sound counsel on this hand.

 

Staying low, 4♠.

[Edmunte1]

I liked Benlessard post, he constructed some hands and saw what happened, though the were too unidirectional conceived towards making 5♠. For example in all hands partener has singleton in ♥, though doubleton is possible. In example a) 5 isn't safe, and i would have definitely overcalled without ♣Q too (let's say that 8 hcp and singleton heart is a minimum overcall).

 

About LOTT: LOTT works extremely bad on this kind of boards with huge fits, so forget about it. In fact when the 2 sides have huge fits (10-11 cards) one in ♠, other in ♥, they are preety balanced in other 2 suits and the number of losers is big (6223 vs 5143/5134/5233/5242/5224). So i won't be opthimistic about making a lot of tricks on this hand. My first move will be trying to buy a cheap cow with 4♠.

 

Another problem: There's a big chance that the bid won't end here. LHO or RHO may bid 5♥. What should i do now? Is partner's pass forcing? Any thoughts?

[bid_em_up]

Dealer: ????? Vul: N/S Scoring: IMP

♠ AQ8653 ♥ J7 ♦ KT ♣ A63

My first thought are

 

ive got AQ8xxx its very likely my pd has only 5s to KJTxx

RHO jumped to 4♥ so they are in a 10 card fit or hes got 4♥ and a ♠void but partner is likely to have a ♥stiff.

 

so imho

Here are possible minimum IMPs red agressive overcall

 

KJTxx                 5 is safe

x

Axx

Qxxx

 

KJTxx                5 inst fun but can make make

Q

xx

KQJx

 

KJTxx                 6 will make but partner wont bid it

x

AQJx

xxx

 

KJTxx                  5 is safe

x

QJxx

KJx

 

 

KJTxxx                 5 will go down

A

xxx

Kxx

 

KJTxx                     6 will make

X

AQxxx

xx

 

KJTxx                      5 is safe

x

Ax

QJxxx

 

The problem i see is that partner is unlikely to have a finesse over the opener.

If partner doesnt have the ♦A♦ my ♦king♦ inst great. And if partner has the ♣QJ♣ instead of the ♣K♣ the king is probably offside. These hand show that slam is unlikely but going down in 5 also. Partner is more likely to have ♥void♥ then ♥xx♥ but he could have a stiff ♥K or Q♥ however.

 

So my bid is 5♠ as long as my partner knows what an IMPs red overcall without ♠AQ♠ looks like.

I don't like Benlassard's post. I don't consider any of these to be an "aggressive" 1♠ overcall. Most of his examples seem perfectly normal (or at least, reasonable) 1♠ overcalls. Some of them may even use Michaels instead though.

 

By "aggressive" overcall, I suspect cherdano means something more along the lines of:

 

K10xxx

x

Axx

xxxx

 

or even worse, but I'm certain he will correct me if I am wrong.

 

4♠ for me.

[cherdano]

My parter had this hand and bid 5S, which turned out well as I had KJxxx x Axxxx KJ. But yeah, I could have had KJxxx xx Axxx xx. (4H doesn't promise 5 hearts with spade shortness...)

[pclayton]

Nope; I don't have safety at the 5 level opposite a typical KJxxx and the A♦.

[benlessard]

For anybody who even think about overcalling 1♠ red vs white.

 

with

 

[hv=v=n&s=skjxxxhxxdaxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Should stick to MPs, avoid playing for money, should read and re-read 'overcall' by Mike Lawrence and should buy his partner a copy of the book.

 

Even

 

[hv=v=n&s=skjxxxhxxdaxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

is not an 1♠ overcall in my book so if you overcall with a hand that is 2 Queen short of a hand i don't overcall with then one of us is wrong ...

 

1♠ isnt lead directing + you are likely to be on lead.

1♠ doesnt take any bidding space.

You don't really want partner to bid 3 over 3 or 4 over 4.

 

You are only helping the opps in the bidding and in the play of the cards by overcalling with these hands. Ive seen a lot of shitty overcalls, preempt and openings by goods players but red vs white it just too insane.

 

The hand i gave are MINIMUM overcalls most of these hand are passable. If you go below these by a lot you play too much MP and are going to have a hard time in Imps.

 

 

As for the 4h bids my experience tell me that they are in a 10 card fit 65%, an 11 card fit 20% and a 9 card fit 15% And if partner has ♥xx♥ he should have enough values that the RHO wont bid 4♥.

[mike777]

For anybody who even think about overcalling 1♠ red vs white.

 

with

 

[hv=v=n&s=skjxxxhxxdaxxxcxx </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- onehand end -->

 

should stick to mps, avoid playing for money, should read and re-read 'overcall' by mike lawrence and should buy his partner a copy of the book.

 

even

 

<!-- onehand begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> dealer: </td> <td> ????? </td> </tr> <tr> <td> vul: </td> <td> n/s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> scoring: </td> <td> imp]133|100|Scoring: IMP

<table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> KJxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> Qx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> Axx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> Qxx </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> [/hv]

 

is not an 1♠ overcall in my book so if you overcall with a hand that is 2 Queen short of a hand i don't overcall with then one of us is wrong ... 

 

1♠ isnt lead directing + you are likely to be on lead.

1♠ doesnt take any bidding space.

You don't really want partner to bid 3 over 3 or 4 over 4.

 

You are only helping the opps in the bidding and in the play of the cards by overcalling with these hands. Ive seen a lot of shitty overcalls, preempt and openings by goods players but red vs white it just too insane.

 

The hand i gave are MINIMUM overcalls most of these hand are passable. If you go below these by a lot you play too much MP and are going to have a hard time in Imps.

 

 

As for the 4h bids my experience tell me that they are in a 10 card fit 65%, an 11 card fit 20% and a 9 card fit 15% And if partner has ♥xx♥ he should have enough values that the RHO wont bid 4♥.

my guess is 25 million play mp ............a couple play money bridge for real stakes and almost zero for dangerous stakes. ;)

 

I just wonder about all these references to money bridge. Are you guys really playing for your house, if so then raise the stakes..they are too low ?

 

I really only know one guy my age who played poker and he played for his house, car and his marriage. I taught him bridge which he loves....have no idea how he is doing. :)

[kenrexford]

It sure seems dumb to repeatedly leave partners with monsters in the dark.

 

This posts reinforces my belief that it is winning bridge to mean it when you overcall 1♠. If I cannot bid 2♠, which requires very little, then I pass. When I overcall 1♠, I could have opened it. Granted, I open 1♠ very light by many standards, but not the junk that leaves partner constantly in the dark after 1X-1♠-4X-?

[pclayton]

For anybody who even think about overcalling 1♠ red vs white.

 

with

 

[hv=v=n&s=skjxxxhxxdaxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Should stick to MPs, avoid playing for money, should read and re-read 'overcall' by Mike Lawrence and should buy his partner a copy of the book.

 

Even

 

[hv=v=n&s=skjxxxhxxdaxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

is not an 1♠ overcall in my book so if you overcall with a hand that is 2 Queen short of a hand i don't overcall with then one of us is wrong ...

 

1♠ isnt lead directing + you are likely to be on lead.

1♠ doesnt take any bidding space.

You don't really want partner to bid 3 over 3 or 4 over 4.

 

You are only helping the opps in the bidding and in the play of the cards by overcalling with these hands. Ive seen a lot of shitty overcalls, preempt and openings by goods players but red vs white it just too insane.

 

The hand i gave are MINIMUM overcalls most of these hand are passable. If you go below these by a lot you play too much MP and are going to have a hard time in Imps.

 

 

As for the 4h bids my experience tell me that they are in a 10 card fit 65%, an 11 card fit 20% and a 9 card fit 15% And if partner has ♥xx♥ he should have enough values that the RHO wont bid 4♥.

Wow - this is news to me. Lawrence would overcall this hand in a heartbeat I'm willing to bet. Is it really safer to pass and compete to 2♠ if it starts 1N p 2♥?

 

Overcalls was written 25 years ago.

 

What 'flaws' does this hand have that makes it unacceptable?

 

We might be on opening lead; we can't tell for sure.

 

I'll buy the bidding space argument if they open 1♣ and we hold diamonds.

 

Why don't I want pard bidding 3 over 3 or 4 over 4? This hand seems close to pure to me. I'd rather have 3-1 in the roundeds, but other than that I like my hand.

[han]

So KJxxx x Axxx xxx is a minimum for Arend? That is news to me too!