Disgusting but right?

[han]

Matchpoints, favorable.

 

Axx

x

Kxxx

QJ98x

 

(1D)-??

[gwnn]

what's so disgusting? :)

[matmat]

yes. passing is indeed disgusting, and indeed right, imo.

[jdonn]

Favorable at mps?? I'm in!

 

You know what always happens to me here is next hand makes a negative double with 3-5 in the majors but they find their 9 card heart fit anyway. I'm preemptively bitter.

[zasanya]

2♣: Right?Time/result will tell.

Disgudting? Not at all.

[TylerE]

Anything but pass is sick. I'd rather balance with 3♣ (over 2M) than overcall 2♣ directly. If you overcall on this kind of garbage how do you EVER have a constructive competitive auction?

[Apollo81]

Anything but pass is sick. I'd rather balance with 3♣ (over 2M) than overcall 2♣ directly. If you overcall on this kind of garbage how do you EVER have a constructive competitive auction?

Passing is sick, especially against bad opponents.

 

There's virtually 0 risk of going for a number here, and the preemptive + lead directional value far outweighs the risk of getting overboard. Besides, partner should be cutting us some major slack for (1♦)-2♣ at MPs.

[jtfanclub]

I would find it disgusting if anybody would pass with the 3154 hand with the AK of diamonds over 1 spade, but would bid 2 clubs with this drek.

 

No, I'm not going to check names across the two posts.

[rogerclee]

2♣, wooooooo.

[Apollo81]

I would find it disgusting if anybody would pass with the 3154 hand with the AK of diamonds over 1 spade, but would bid 2 clubs with this drek.

 

No, I'm not going to check names across the two posts.

These two situations are completely different. This is like saying "I would find it disgusting if anybody would fold AQ after a raise, but would raise with AJ over a call"

[cherdano]

Disgusting? Didn't I get ♣98 for a reason?

[jtfanclub]

These two situations are completely different.

No, the situations are exactly the same. It's a 2/1 overcall in which you have a singleton in an unbid major.

 

The scoring is different- one is MPs NV, the other is IMPs Vul. If the decision on both is based on venue, say so. Me, I don't buy it. On the one hand, Match Points gives you a little more leeway when NV. On the other hand, -150 is probably a loss of 1 or 2 IMPs, but darn close to a 0 in MPs. I would not feel more comfortable if partner raised me to 3♣ on this one if we were NV in MPs than if we were Vul in IMPs. Partner knows the scoring too.

[rogerclee]

These two situations are completely different.

No, the situations are exactly the same. It's a 2/1 overcall in which you have a singleton in an unbid major.

 

The scoring is different- one is MPs NV, the other is IMPs Vul. If the decision on both is based on venue, say so. Me, I don't buy it. On the one hand, Match Points gives you a little more leeway when NV. On the other hand, -150 is probably a loss of 1 or 2 IMPs, but darn close to a 0 in MPs. I would not feel more comfortable if partner raised me to 3♣ on this one if we were NV in MPs than if we were Vul in IMPs. Partner knows the scoring too.

Overcalling 1♦ is not the same as overcalling 1♠.

 

Also, a holding like QJ98x is much more offensive than AKxxx (though obviously AKxxx is a better holding).

[TimG]

Overcalling 1♦ is not the same as overcalling 1♠.

Especially if the 1♦ opening is somewhat amorphous as in standard 5-card major systems.

[Guest Jlall]

I would overcall against the best players in the world, and I would overcall if they opened 1S.

[TylerE]

My concern has nothing to do with going for a number. If this is a 2♣ bid, how does partner ever know what's going on when (1♦) - 2♣ could be on:

[hv=s=saxxhxdkxxxcqj98x]133|100|[/hv]

 

or

 

[hv=s=saxxhxdkxxxcqj98x]133|100|[/hv]

[jdonn]

You overcall a major with both hands too (in fact lighter than the first one) and somehow seem to survive.

[oldman5757]

A 2♣ bid here likely causes more problems for the opponents than it creates for us, so why not. :)

[Apollo81]

These two situations are completely different.

No, the situations are exactly the same. It's a 2/1 overcall in which you have a singleton in an unbid major.

 

you think (1♠)-2♣ and (1♦)-2♣ are exactly the same...

 

wow.

[cherdano]

My concern has nothing to do with going for a number. If this is a 2♣ bid, how does partner ever know what's going on when (1♦) - 2♣ could be on:

[hv=s=saxxhxdkxxxcqj98x]133|100|[/hv]

 

or

 

[hv=s=saxxhxdkxxxcqj98x]133|100|[/hv]

I open 1♠ with both AKTxx xx KJx xx and KQxxx AKJx Ax Kx, how does partner know what is going on?

[ArtK78]

My concern has nothing to do with going for a number. If this is a 2♣ bid, how does partner ever know what's going on when (1♦) - 2♣ could be on:

[hv=s=saxxhxdkxxxcqj98x]133|100|[/hv]

 

or

 

[hv=s=saxxhxdkxxxcqj98x]133|100|[/hv]

Partner doesn't know what we have. A 2♣ overcall has a wide range, just as an opening 1 bid has a wide range.

 

Partner bids his cards and expects that I will bid my cards.

[kenrexford]

This is a hand for why I like 2NT to not be "two lower unbid" but both minors. Of course, some might find 2NT here as sick. LOL

 

At MP, I'm in for 2♣. At IMP, no way. Maybe 3♣, but not 2♣.

[effervesce]

These two situations are completely different.

No, the situations are exactly the same. It's a 2/1 overcall in which you have a singleton in an unbid major.

 

The scoring is different- one is MPs NV, the other is IMPs Vul. If the decision on both is based on venue, say so. Me, I don't buy it. On the one hand, Match Points gives you a little more leeway when NV. On the other hand, -150 is probably a loss of 1 or 2 IMPs, but darn close to a 0 in MPs. I would not feel more comfortable if partner raised me to 3♣ on this one if we were NV in MPs than if we were Vul in IMPs. Partner knows the scoring too.

No, they're distinctly different, in that the 2♣ call here _removes bidding space_ and is thus slightly preemptive on the opponents. This is important. For example, you might stretch to bid 1♠ over 1m with

 

AQ98 x Kxxx Qxxx

 

but you would be much less willing to bid 1♠ over 1♥ with this _exact same_ hand - as bidding 1♠ over 1♥ removes no space. In the first case, partner should expect you might have stretched to shut out the hearts.

[effervesce]

These two situations are completely different.

No, the situations are exactly the same. It's a 2/1 overcall in which you have a singleton in an unbid major.

 

The scoring is different- one is MPs NV, the other is IMPs Vul. If the decision on both is based on venue, say so. Me, I don't buy it. On the one hand, Match Points gives you a little more leeway when NV. On the other hand, -150 is probably a loss of 1 or 2 IMPs, but darn close to a 0 in MPs. I would not feel more comfortable if partner raised me to 3♣ on this one if we were NV in MPs than if we were Vul in IMPs. Partner knows the scoring too.

No, they're distinctly different, in that the 2♣ call here _removes bidding space_ and is thus slightly preemptive on the opponents. This is important. For example, you might stretch to bid 1♠ over 1m with

 

AQ98 x Kxx Qxxxx

 

as the bid might shut out the hearts, but you would be much less willing to bid 1♥ over 1♦ with

 

x AQ98 Kxx Qxxxx

 

as in this second case, a bid of 1♥ has zero preemptive effect. Partner should also take this into account when responding to your overcall. If the overcall removed no space, then you have a hand that definitely has not stretched. But in a (1♥) - 2♣ case, partner should take into account the fact that you may have stretched to shut out the spades, for example a hand like x Kxx Kxxx QJ98x is possible, but he would (rightly) not expect Kxx x Kxxx QJ98x.

[pclayton]

A is an easy 2C overcall NV at MPs. You will give LHO a problem with any hand that looks like a NFB. Good MP players give up a lot of NV undertricks during the course of a session.

 

On B I'd probably overcall 1N. The hand looks notrumpy with the long suit, QT's and 6322.