gwnn Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 RHO deals and opens 1♥ all vul IMP pairs J752QA9AKQJ76 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 I like 2♣, planning to double a heart raise or bid spades over partner's advance later on. Obviously this can backfire if the hand passes out and partner has something like five good spades and out. However, I've found that this approach usually works a bit better than starting with a double (planning to introduce clubs later if partner doesn't bid spades) because the level is annoyingly likely to be bumped. In other words, I am much happier bidding 1♥-2♣-3♥-P-P-X rather than 1♥-X-3♥-P-P-4♣. Note that it's not even clear we get to spades (if we have spades) on the second auction as partner is unlikely to be strong enough to bid spades at the three level and the double followed by 4♣ doesn't promise spades (it's a strong one-suiter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 I voted 2♣ (Adam said why), although I disagree with the statement that dbl followed by 4♣ doesn't promise spades. I prefer a style in which a double promises tolerance (3, at the very least 2) for the unbid major(s), no matter how strong. Without spades, 3♥ would be an option (not on a 6-card vulnerable, of course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 Mark me down for 2♣ as well... (For what its worth, double doesn't call to me. The only other bid that has much appeal is 3♥, however, I'd like another club or a bit more strength to consider this bid) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 I would X, keeps spades in play and I can bid clubs next if I need to. Obviously if it goes 1H X 4H p p I will be disappointed :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 I would X, keeps spades in play and I can bid clubs next if I need to. Obviously if it goes 1H X 4H p p I will be disappointed :P And yet, still I'm only X in the polls...I'm glad that somebody agrees with me though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 I don't get it. This seems like an easy one. I overcall 2♣, and then I bid spades later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 Well, I'm gonna contribute to your confusion, ken. I dbl :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 25, 2007 Report Share Posted September 25, 2007 2C for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 Just to have fun with the weed-smokers... LHO deals and opens 1♥, all vul, IMP pairs.Your partner overcalls 2♣.RHO raises hearts to 3♥, some kind of mixed raise stuff.You pass; Opener passes.Partner bids 3♠. What does partner have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 It's just a point count thing for me...I don't want partner passing with KQxx xxxx Kxx xx or suchlike. Since I have a strong hand, and I can better show that hand with an X, I'll do it. If I were weaker, I'd bid 2♣. But...that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 2♣ seems like the best start to me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinbrasil Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 I double. One of points is I have 7 tricks to play NT if partner bid 1NT i raise to 3. But mainly is to let partner compete with spades not under total press.I imagine what can be the diferences in (maybe you can help me thinking about):a)1H-2C-3H-PP - X - P - ? (KQxx xxx xxx xxx) (xxxx Axx Kxxx xx)and b ): 1H-X-3H-? (KQxx xxx xxx xxx) (xxxx Axx Kxxx xx) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 I don't get it. This seems like an easy one. I overcall 2♣, and then I bid spades later. First time I fully agree with you :ph34r:. I wouldn't even think of double as an alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 Double seemed automatic to me. I've sufficient support for all the unbid suits (I know plenty people who would double with xx of diamonds with weaker hands). If it goes 1H X 4H P P I'll probably just pass the hand out, but I'm happy bidding clubs at the 3 and maybe 4 level otherwise, and I don't want to stop partner from bidding spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 2♣. I've never considered hands like this a problem - maybe something is wrong with me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted September 26, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 well yea 2♣? X? raptor nt? (actually this is stronger than any limited raptor) NOOOO. I just learned in the junior lesson that 3♣ is good. Because "vulnerable we need tricks". And "what are we doing after X? what are we doing after 2♣?". I didn't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 How are people selected to teach junior lessons on BBO? It seems like several times that things which are pretty far from conventional wisdom are taught as "standard" or "correct." Hopefully this is just one or two "out there" teachers and not the general trend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted September 26, 2007 Report Share Posted September 26, 2007 2♣. I've never considered hands like this a problem - maybe something is wrong with me? Probably not...the hand again for reference. ♠J752♥Q♦A9♣AKQJ76 How strong would it have to be for it to be a problem? If the Q were an A? How about the jack? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted September 27, 2007 Report Share Posted September 27, 2007 This "I have support for everything" theory seems odd to me. We often make takeout doubles with 3-card support for one of the unbids, right? With a nice 15-count and 4342 pattern, for instance, we might double a 1♣ opening, as takeout. That makes sense. However, it just seems that an overcall does not deny three or four cards in at least one of the unbid suits. I really cannot imagine, for instance, opting to double that 1♣ opening with ♠432 ♥AKQJxxx ♦Axx ♣void. A double would meet the definition, sort of. But it seems a bit wrong for some reason. I can't put my finger on it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted September 27, 2007 Report Share Posted September 27, 2007 I'd rather play golf than bridge. Except when I don't :( Playing Overcall Structure, this hand isn't a problem for me, but I know the rest of you get tired of hearing about my product placement. I would probably double and see if I can dodge a 4♥ call. Over anything else I am very well placed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 27, 2007 Report Share Posted September 27, 2007 Playing Overcall Structure, this hand isn't a problem for me yet agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted September 27, 2007 Report Share Posted September 27, 2007 Playing Overcall Structure, this hand isn't a problem for me yet agree I get to misquote you some time Han. Playing Overcall Structure, this hand isn't a problem for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 27, 2007 Report Share Posted September 27, 2007 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted September 27, 2007 Report Share Posted September 27, 2007 2♣. I've never considered hands like this a problem - maybe something is wrong with me? Probably not...the hand again for reference. ♠J752♥Q♦A9♣AKQJ76 How strong would it have to be for it to be a problem? If the Q were an A? How about the jack? If I had J752 A A9 AKQJ76 I'd double. That's enough for double followed by x♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.