Fit finding...

[awm]

Frances' idea seemed interesting to me, but it really came down to only two choices for almost everyone, and I think Josh Donn gave a pretty good argument for why one call is just superior. This one (or hands like it) comes up from time to time in the forums and might be a better gauge of style?

[P_Marlowe]

2C.

 

But I am not sure, if Marshall Miles will like to be called

Scientist or Monkey?

 

He would certainly advocate 1S.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[bill1157]

2♣. transpose the ♥'s and ♣'s and 1♠ is right

 

Bill

[mike777]

Gadget=Astro cuebids.

 

1h=(2h) shows 4 spades and longer clubs.

 

 

1s=2s is 4h and longer C

1d=2d=4h and longer C

1c=2c=4h and longer D

[Cascade]

Being a Naturalist I bid 2♣.

 

In a partnership where four-card overcalls are common then there is some merit in 1♠ on this type of hand - and even more so if playing canape overcalls.

 

In one partnership I play 3♣ shows this hand - exactly four spades and five or more clubs and around 11-15 hcp.

 

I have though that there is some merit in playing an overcall style where 2minor shows these sort of hands. And therefore doing something else with your single-suited minor hands - intermediate jumps.

[TimG]

2♣. transpose the ♥'s and ♣'s and 1♠ is right

Transpose the hearts and clubs and there is a strong case to be made for pass over a 1♥ opening.

 

I would bid 1♠ in the actual case, but don't think of it as a mastermind bid, so I abstain. (Perhaps that is a true sign of a mastermind.)

[Tola18]

edit.

[Fluffy]

I would overcall 1♠ for sure over a 1♣ opening.

 

Over 1♥ however, pass and 2♣ look like sensible options, I like 1♠ less because the battle spades vs hearts happens kinda often and we might find ourselves at the 3 level on a 4-3 fit.

 

I normally need more strenght to overcall a 5 card suit at the 2 level, but the concentrated honnors look like a good substitute. I think I'd bid 2♣.

[Winstonm]

Being scientifically inclined, 2C.

[helene_t]

Sometimes 1♠ with this shape, but the clubs are good enough this time.

[the hog]

Its not that the Cs are not good enough to overcall, but bidding 2C may lose the S suit. I bid 1S if not plying Polish NT overcall.

[maggieb]

2♣, the normal bidder, would only bid 1♠ NV at MPs.

[cherdano]

Frances' idea seemed interesting to me, but it really came down to only two choices for almost everyone, and I think Josh Donn gave a pretty good argument for why one call is just superior. This one (or hands like it) comes up from time to time in the forums and might be a better gauge of style?

This really isn't the same thing though. Frances' post was about everyone's general approach to partnership. (That there were only two choices in the BBF crowd just shows that bashers and partnership enders maybe don't post all that much on BBF :) )

I don't think you can conclude anything general from the answer to your poll question.

[Codo]

I like Raptor, but my reg. does not, so I try 2 Club. The chance that this lose the spades is there but lower then the chance of losing the clubs while bidding 1 Spade.

[jdonn]

Obviously 2♣. I accept that there are styles that would advocate 1♠ but they sure aren't mine, nor do I believe they are standard in most places.

[blackshoe]

2♥. Not Astro, for me, but top and bottom. Same hand type in this case. Second choice 2♣, third choice 1♠. I don't really like one spade, 'cause partner will never play me for this hand even if I bid clubs twice later.

[neilkaz]

This is a good 5 card ♣ suit and a quite good 4 card ♠ suit. I frequently overcall good 4 card suits at the 1 level and my PD's have seen this enough to expect it, but here, I have to be natural unless playing Raptor here or maybe I decide my ♠ are good enough to try Michaels which I'd have included as an option.

 

Tough hand here since once you bid 2♣, it is quite unlikely that PD holds enough in ♠ to introduce them. With that in mind, I bid 2♥ and take my chances with most PD's.

[kgr]

2C: I play this as clubs and spades. Mostly 4 card Spade and better clubs then spades.

If I don't play the above then I would always bid 2C.

[gnasher]

2♣. Making a four-card overcall means that you can't safely bid again, because of the risk of getting preference to spades. If I overcall, LHO bids 2♥, and that comes back to me, I have a good enough hand to want to have another go. Hence I overcall 2♣. If I were a bit weaker, I'd bid 1♠.

[skjaeran]

This is a 2♣ overbid for me. Make the hand a little weaker, and I pass.

[cherdano]

2♣.  (...) If I overcall, LHO bids 2♥, and that comes back to me, I have a good enough hand to want to have another go. 

This is a 2♣ overbid for me. Make the hand a little weaker, and I pass.

!

[TimG]

2♣.  Making a four-card overcall means that you can't safely bid again, because of the risk of getting preference to spades.  If I overcall, LHO bids 2♥, and that comes back to me, I have a good enough hand to want to have another go.  Hence I overcall 2♣.  If I were a bit weaker, I'd bid 1♠.

So long as you and partner are on the same page, you can bid 3♣ after (1♥)-1♠-(P)-P; (2♥); advancer will not fail to support spades and then take preference when clubs are better.

 

Perhaps this hand is not quite good enough for that, but it is not that much different from (1♥)-2♣-(P)-P; (2♥)-2♠. Here, if we have "hit" partner he would very likely have raised a 1♠ overcall.

[andy_h]

This seems like an easy 2C for me. Hate X, don't like raptor nor pass and I guess 1S would be my 2nd choice.

[skjaeran]

2♣.  (...) If I overcall, LHO bids 2♥, and that comes back to me, I have a good enough hand to want to have another go. 

This is a 2♣ overbid for me. Make the hand a little weaker, and I pass.

!

LOL at my mistyping, should be overcall.;)

Even if I'm close to minimum I might bid again even with a passed partner.

[whereagles]

I'm ok with doubling. Over a possible 2♦ by pard, I'll have to pass and hope for the best, but I got a good bid over any other response.