What to bid?

[Guest Jlall]

I hate anything but 2C

[jdonn]

2♣ doesn't deny hearts, and partner is not barred, either from bidding 2♥ or 2♦ (over which I have a routine 2♥) should LHO pass. Nor is partner barred from making a responsive double if, as is likely, LHO raises spades.

 

So the argument for double seems, to me, to be based on the narrow set of hands on which:

 

1) partner has 4+ hearts and can't show them after we bid 2♣, and

 

2) we have the values (strength or shape) to outbid the opps, or

 

3) we belong in diamonds and partner won't get us there without the double

 

Finding our heart fit is of no use if the opps can outbid us.

 

OTOH, the argument for 2♣ is based on the broader (I think) set of hands on which:

 

1) we belong in clubs, or

 

2) when we belong in hearts, partner can show them, or

 

3) we definitely don't belong in diamonds, and partner will force us there if we double (promising some diamond length when played in the real universe), or

 

4) (and this is a very minor factor) the opps will be bidding hearts if we don't show them via double.

 

The old Italians used to survive playing offshape takeout doubles, but my recollection from reading old Bridge Worlds is that they did so despite this approach, not because of it.

 

Finally, it is all well and good to say that we pass 3♦ if partner bids it over 2♠, but consider the following scenarios:

 

1) LHO bids 4♠.. and partner with 1=3=6=3 innocently bids 5♦

 

2) LHO passes, and partner cue bids and then bids 3♦...ok, you say, you bid 3♣ then 3♥... does that tell partner, who thinks he has a gf hand opposite the 1=4=3=5 you've suggested, that you hold a 2=4=1=6 working 11 count?

 

3) LHO passes and partner bids a constructive 3♦ on, say, xxx x AJxxx KJxx. I'd rather be in 5♣ than 3♦... it's as likely to make (for these purposes) and pays a heck of a lot more.

 

4) While we can get to a heart slam after double, we are not so likely to get to a club slam after double, since partner will never play us for a 6 card suit, nor will he realize that we have nothing wasted opposite a diamond suit such as Jxxx(x).

 

Nope, for me, double is a sign of wild-eyed major-fascination  :)  :)

 

OTOH, it might work  B)

Well, with a little analysis I can show you why the second group is far broader. :) This will probably be wordy, but what the heck I can't resist after you busted out the wild-eyed again.

 

Let's ignore 3) from the first group and 4) from the second, since they both seem to be relatively insignificant factors, of which there are IMO more in favor of double than 2♣ (we belong in 1♠X, we belong in 1NT, partner leads Q of clubs from Qx after overcall.) I will also combine 1) and 2) from the first group since you were putting them together anyway. So that leaves us with, according to you -

 

Double wins when:

1) We belong in hearts, wouldn't get there after 2♣, and can outbid the opponents

 

2♣ wins when:

1) We belong in clubs

2) We belong in hearts and get there after 2♣

3) Double finds a bad diamond contract

 

On a fair look, the first thing I see is that 2) is not a gain at all for 2♣, merely a break even since obviously you would also get to hearts after a double. So we get rid of that. The next thing I notice is I compare the 1)s. Pretty much it's the chance we belong in hearts vs. clubs. But in the list for the bid you oppose, you seem to have added these nagging restrictions of we wouldn't get there after the other bid, and we would buy the contract. Those seem to have been conveniently forgotten in the list for the bid you favor! So now I have us here.

 

Double:

1) We belong in hearts, wouldn't get there after 2♣, and can outbid the opponents

 

2♣:

1) We belong in clubs, wouldn't get there after double, and can outbid the opponents

2) Double reaches a bad diamond contract

 

Ok now I'll dig a little deeper. If we compare the 1)s, the one in favor of double seems more important since we are talking about a major instead of a minor. Then when we reach 2), this seems countered by a major concern going the other way that would make a nice 2) for double. When clubs aren't breaking and 2♣X gets killed. And why shouldn't it, with such a terrible suit. So here is where I have it end.

 

Double

1) We belong in hearts

2) 2♣ leads to a bad strain

 

2♣

1) We belong in clubs

2) Double leads to a bad strain

 

What it seems to me is the points in favor of 2♣ are more likely, but the points in favor of double are more important/severe. At least I hope you would agree this is a much more fair comparison.

 

 

As briefly as possible to address the rest of your post:

 

I actually agree with you per the Italians of old, but their 'offshape' is not equatable to this one. This is talking about a takeout double with four cards in the unbid major and short by one card in a minor. The doubles they made as I recall were as extreme as doubling a 1♠ opening bid with 4144 shape and things like that. Not exactly the same ball of wax.

 

And for your list of scenarios:

1) Well firstly, he isn't down yet. But more importantly, he could as easily be 3631. It works both ways as always. If anything it seems to me in the general sense that if I am about to be preempted, I would rather show the unbid major and make a general statement about my hand than show one not-good minor suit.

2) This does not seem like much of a point against double at all (I know you meant 1426.) I even got to show my clubs!

3) Not the greatest contract, but in the real world they probably raised spades with half the deck and 9 spades and partner made a responsive double. Anyway, again it swings both ways, the 3154 could be a 3451 where after the overcall you play in 2♣ against these opponents who never raise spades :P

4) Well they opened the bidding and I have an 11 count. I am not exactly picturing that slam yet.

 

You still write far better than I do!

[han]

Josh, mikeh already said that he had 2-4-1-6 shape in mind when he wrote that post you are citing.

[jdonn]

Josh, mikeh already said that he had 2-4-1-6 shape in mind when he wrote that post you are citing.

Uh, it looks like he said quite the opposite to me.

 

Also just to avoid secrecy, I have been making minor edits to my post today throughout the day where I noticed redundancy. They are pretty much all making it shorter, not that anyone would notice.

[han]

Josh, mikeh already said that he had 2-4-1-6 shape in mind when he wrote that post you are citing.

Uh, it looks like he said quite the opposite to me.

Interesting. Having read his comment starting with "oops" again, I fail to read it from your point of view.

[awm]

I like 2♣ here. A few points that haven't been brought up:

 

(1) Occasionally we are just getting killed no matter what we do. Perhaps we will wish we passed. But in general, it's easier for opponents to penalize when I start with a double. They can redouble, then either hand can penalty double, or they can pass and takeout double whatever contract partner names. I think we would be pretty miserable over 1♠-X-XX-2♦-X don't you? While it's certainly possible that overcalling 2♣ goes for a number, it's a bit more difficult to penalize(sometimes LHO doesn't have the four hearts to make a negative double and RHO has the club length, or LHO has a penalty pass but RHO has a natural 2♠ rebid in balancing position).

 

(2) Bidding 2♣ doesn't bar partner. In fact, over some likely auctions such as 1♠-2♣-2♠, partner has an easy bid to show a four-card heart suit. On the other hand, there is no bid after an initial double that shows a six-card club suit (without also showing extra values). Our odds of finding hearts after a 2♣ overcall are still okay (albeit worse than after a double) whereas our odds of finding clubs after a double are slim to none.

[cherdano]

I like 2♣ here. A few points that haven't been brought up:

 

(1) Occasionally we are just getting killed no matter what we do. Perhaps we will wish we passed. But in general, it's easier for opponents to penalize when I start with a double. They can redouble, then either hand can penalty double, or they can pass and takeout double whatever contract partner names. I think we would be pretty miserable over 1♠-X-XX-2♦-X don't you? While it's certainly possible that overcalling 2♣ goes for a number, it's a bit more difficult to penalize(sometimes LHO doesn't have the four hearts to make a negative double and RHO has the club length, or LHO has a penalty pass but RHO has a natural 2♠ rebid in balancing position).

While I prefer 2♣ over double on this hand, I disagree with this reason. Just by experience, I have seen way more telephone number after 2-level overcalls on bad suits than after takeout doubles. Your reasoning just doesn't work, after a takeout double they typically (and sensibly) only redouble with a balanced hands, which means you won't typically run into very bad trump breaks. (Redoubling on unbalanced hands hoping for a complete misfit with partner would be a bad strategy.) Also, you have a lot more space to wiggle into your best fit.

[benlessard]

To double with off shape and minimum hand is something no expert will do unless their system allow it.

 

As for 2♣ or pass i slightly prefer pass.

 

Im used to play raptor wich i think is mandatory in Imps.

 

 

edited --- i misread the vuln ... W vs R 2♣ is the only bid.