How much did partner show?

[cherdano]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=skt73hkjt2dj86ctx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(P) P (1♦*) P

(1♠) P (2♠) 3♦

(P) ?[/hv]

Opponents are playing a modern precision, where 1♦ is 2+, and 11-13 if balanced. Partner didn't have a chance to show diamonds earlier.

 

How much did partner show? If you pass, how much more would you need to act? If you bid, is this the absolute minimum?

[effervesce]

Looks like partner has a normal 6+ diamond overcall type hand. Give me the K of diamonds instead of the J and I might try 3NT.

[the hog]

Playing against a possible 2 card D suit, I have always maintained that is is a god idea to have a natural 2D overcall available, else you may find yourself in this quandry. I would bid 3N with your posted hand.

[Guest Jlall]

Agree with having a natural 2D overcall available, barring that all we know is that partner couldn't overcall 3D which leaves him with a pretty wide range of hands. With a stiff spade he will probably be bidding 3D with a lot of hands. I guess with no aces I would pass, but could easily have a cold 3N.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

How much would partner show in the sequence

 

(1S) - Pass - (2S) - 3D

 

More precise, do you play OBAR bids?

 

In the original sequence, an 3D OBAR bid is even safer,

because opener is tighly limited, and so is responder.

 

To answer your question, I would move only with opening

strength, ... which I wont have, since I am a passed hand.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[hotShot]

Shouldn't there be a dbl somewhere, if we can pick redbl?

[Guest Jlall]

Shouldn't there be a dbl somewhere, if we can pick redbl?

He was just offering a more funny version of "monkeys"

[whereagles]

Playing against a possible 2 card D suit, I have always maintained that is is a god idea to have a natural 2D overcall available, else you may find yourself in this quandry. I would bid 3N with your posted hand.

Agree, except that I would pass now.

[benlessard]

Easy pass for me.

[Fluffy]

At this vulnerability partner might be just proposing a sacrifice, it is better to pass.

[Apollo81]

Minimum change to make it a bid would be ♦J-->♦K

[TimG]

Agree with having a natural 2D overcall available, barring that all we know is that partner couldn't overcall 3D which leaves him with a pretty wide range of hands. With a stiff spade he will probably be bidding 3D with a lot of hands. I guess with no aces I would pass, but could easily have a cold 3N.

Suppose you agree that a 2♦ overcall is natural. What about this sequence:

 

(1♦)-1♥-(1♠)-2♦? Is this a good raise to 2♥ or a natural bid in diamonds?

[pclayton]

Agree with having a natural 2D overcall available, barring that all we know is that partner couldn't overcall 3D which leaves him with a pretty wide range of hands. With a stiff spade he will probably be bidding 3D with a lot of hands. I guess with no aces I would pass, but could easily have a cold 3N.

Suppose you agree that a 2♦ overcall is natural. What about this sequence:

 

(1♦)-1♥-(1♠)-2♦? Is this a good raise to 2♥ or a natural bid in diamonds?

You can play around with this sequence a lot, but I've never seen 2♦ played as natural.

 

Most play 2♦ and 2♠ as various kinds of raises. The need for defining certain cue bids as x and y goes away with transfer advances however.

[TimG]

Agree with having a natural 2D overcall available, barring that all we know is that partner couldn't overcall 3D which leaves him with a pretty wide range of hands. With a stiff spade he will probably be bidding 3D with a lot of hands. I guess with no aces I would pass, but could easily have a cold 3N.

Suppose you agree that a 2♦ overcall is natural. What about this sequence:

 

(1♦)-1♥-(1♠)-2♦? Is this a good raise to 2♥ or a natural bid in diamonds?

You can play around with this sequence a lot, but I've never seen 2♦ played as natural.

 

Most play 2♦ and 2♠ as various kinds of raises. The need for defining certain cue bids as x and y goes away with transfer advances however.

When you play transfer advances, don't transfers usually start at the cue-bid and end at the transfer raise?

 

So, in a sequence like (1♦)-1♥-P-? transfers would start (and end) at 2♦. If, however, 1♦ could be short and you decide that a direct 2♦ overcall of such a 1♦ opening is natural, does the "cue-bid" exist? So, I don't see that transfer advances obviates the need to define what is a cue-bid.

[Guest Jlall]

I play that 2D after an overcall is a cuebid, and 3D is natural. The difference to me is that the cuebid is much more important when partner has overcalled (limit+ raise) than when they open 1D (michaels, which can be substituted with 2H, so basically you lose a weak 2H overcall).

[han]

I actually thought that 2D would have been natural but obviously we didn't discuss this well enough.

 

What if 2D was available as natural, what would that mean for the delayed 3D? Would it show a better hand, a weaker hand, a different hand or does it just not exist?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

If 2D would be natural, passing ruled out a biddable 6 carder.

Also you could bid a 2-suiter with clubs and hearts via double.

 

Hence 3D would look even more look like a OBAR bid, based on

a 5 carder, ... although I am not really convinced, so most likely

a delayed 3D does not exist in this scenario.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Guest Jlall]

I actually thought that 2D would have been natural but obviously we didn't discuss this well enough.

 

What if 2D was available as natural, what would that mean for the delayed 3D? Would it show a better hand, a weaker hand, a different hand or does it just not exist?

For me it would be a weaker hand, like a prebalance. Maybe it would look something like a 3D opener.

[awm]

I'd pass. There could be a game if 2♦ over 1♦ would've been artificial, but I don't think it's odds on to bid game. There are many hands that look like a weak two in diamonds where partner would bid here, especially given that our four-card spade holding basically marks partner with shortage. There is also some concern that given our combined diamond holding, opener's suit is actually clubs and a club lead may beat 3NT many tricks.

 

I'm curious that so many people seem to like to play (1♦)-2♦ here as natural and (1♦)-2♥ as michaels. Certainly it can be useful to have a natural diamond call available, but is michaels really better than a weak two in hearts?

[jdonn]

I'm curious that so many people seem to like to play (1♦)-2♦ here as natural and (1♦)-2♥ as michaels. Certainly it can be useful to have a natural diamond call available, but is michaels really better than a weak two in hearts?

As an opening bid a weak 2 is quite useful, as an overcall much less so. Less effective since they have acted already, and less needed since you can overcall 1♥ if nothing else fits.

[Guest Jlall]

I'm curious that so many people seem to like to play (1♦)-2♦ here as natural and (1♦)-2♥ as michaels. Certainly it can be useful to have a natural diamond call available, but is michaels really better than a weak two in hearts?

A lot of people just prefer to overcall 1 with most weakish hand and 6 hearts anyways, so losing the weak 2 overcall isn't bad if you're one of those people.

[gnasher]

If I had to give up something, I'd rather keep the weak jump overcall and lose the Michaels cue-bid.

 

A lot of people just prefer to overcall 1 with most weakish hand and 6 hearts anyways, so losing the weak 2 overcall isn't bad if you're one of those people.

Those would be the people one only ever meets in the first round of a Swiss event, wouldn't they?

[Guest Jlall]

If I had to give up something, I'd rather keep the weak jump overcall and lose the Michaels cue-bid.

 

A lot of people just prefer to overcall 1 with most weakish hand and 6 hearts anyways, so losing the weak 2 overcall isn't bad if you're one of those people.

Those would be the people one only ever meets in the first round of a Swiss event, wouldn't they?

Well I am certainly one of those people. I would say it is a very common style among the top US players (meckstroth, hamman, levin, etc). I have noticed that europeans/aussies tend to be much more aggressive in their weak jump overcalls. These days if it's up to me I prefer to not even play WJO when vul, and play them when NV but would guess that of hands in the range of 5-10 with 6 hearts I overcall 1 rather than 2 4 times as often.

[gnasher]

Those would be the people one only ever meets in the first round of a Swiss event, wouldn't they?

Well I am certainly one of those people.

Well, you probably would only ever meet me in the first round of a Swiss.

[gnasher]

These days if it's up to me I prefer to not even play WJO when vul

Since I started playing bridge in the 1980s, English players have moved from intermediate jump overcalls to weak, from a Multi 2D back to weak twos in the majors, and (to some extent) from a weak notrump to a strong notrump. Curiously, US bridge seems to be going in the opposite direction.