Requirements for 2 suited overcalls

[Chamaco]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=shxxdq9xxxckqjtxx&s=skq9xhatxxxdxxcxx]133|200|Scoring: MP

1♠-(2NT)-4♠- Dbl

all pass[/hv]

 

I was S and I took North's unusual 2NT as a good hand, given unfavourable vuln.

At equal vuln, I would have passed, but given the vuilnerability, I assumed N to have more defense potential, so I doubled.

 

Declarer picked the trump suit for 1 losers (he wd have done it anyway even if playing undoubled, given the announced minors in N) and conceded the A of H.

 

So let's take this hand as a starting point to define your suggestions to deal with partner's 2-suited overcalls.

I assume in the rest of the post we use Michael's cuebid and Unusual 2NT.

I know there other good methods out there (other 2 suited overcalls such as Roman or Ghestem, transfer overcalls, Meta defense, etc), but for the purpose of this post please do not start the discussion on other bidding methods: I want to focus on hand evaluation.

Thanks ! :)

 

We currently play MINIMAX ranges when not vuln or when at equal vuln.

MINIMAX is defined as either less than opening in HCP (say 6/-10-11) OR reverse in HCP (15/16+), since intermediate hands (11-15) will just bid the suits.

 

1) do you think defining two suiters in terms of LOSERS instead of HCP will work better ? The problem I can think of in using losers is that pard will have more trouble deciding to penalize.

 

2) what are your suggested requirements for a 2-suiters at unfavourable vulnerability? Could you opost an example hand of the worse hand that would use Michaels' or Unusual 2NT ?

 

 

3) DO YOU THINK IT IS WISE TO USE A 2 SUITED OVERCALL HAVING 65 SHAPE (ONE SUIT LONGER)? Does your opinion change on this issue whether the 65 is in

a ) the minors

b ) the majors

c ) major-minor

[Free]

Using losers to determine weither or not you'll overcall or show 2-suiters might be a help, but you won't have better hands all of a sudden. The hand you show has maximum 6 losers, so it's good enough for a 2NT bid! This doesn't give you any defensive tricks however.

 

This hand is a nice hand to play with, but not to defend with. Imo, the 2NT bidder should pull the dbl and bid 5♣ to show better ♣s. He knows he has 0-1 trick, and defending in a trump contract with a trump void isn't the best you can do.

[Chamaco]

Using losers to determine weither or not you'll overcall or show 2-suiters might be a help, but you won't have better hands all of a sudden.  The hand you show has maximum 6 losers, so it's good enough for a 2NT bid!  This doesn't give you any defensive tricks however.

 

This hand is a nice hand to play with, but not to defend with.  Imo, the 2NT bidder should pull the dbl and bid 5♣ to show better ♣s.  He knows he has 0-1 trick, and defending in a trump contract with a trump void isn't the best you can do.

Ty Frederic :).

 

Another question (I'll add to the original post) is:

 

DO YOU THINK IT IS WISE TO USE A 2 SUITER HAVING 65 SHAPE (ONE SUIT LONGER)?

[Free]

Yes and no, since I usually overcall with 5-4's :) In this case, I don't think it's the best idea to show 2-suiter. First of all, the ♣ are a lot better AND longer than ♦, and second, you give too much information to opps, without willing to play in ♦ anyway. What happens if they start ♠? You have to ruff, create your ♣ and ♦, use another trump to get back to your ♣s,... I think it's better to ignore the ♦s here.

 

However, say you have:

♦ Q9xxxx

♣ KQJTx

I would definetly show a 2-suiter.

[whereagles]

1. I prefer losers to points. Points work ok for NT contracts on balanced hands, but that's just about it.

 

2. I'm from the school of two-suited overcalls on any strenght. To show a 4 loser or better hand double or cue later.

 

3. Shapes 65 or 66 or 75 are ok. With a 66 or 65 bid NT later. With 75 or a good 65 bid the longer suit later.

 

As for your hand, double is risky. While the misfit gives you some hopes of defeating the contract, it's by no means a certainty. After all, they took you out of an undertrick or two in 3 clubs, so any plus score here will be good.

 

By the way I wouldn't take out the double on 4S. The 2NT overcall doesn't promise any defensive values, so why overrule pard?

[pclayton]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=shxxdq9xxxckqjtxx&s=skq9xhatxxxdxxcxx]133|200|Scoring: MP

1♠-(2NT)-4♠- Dbl

all pass[/hv]

 

I was S and I took North's unusual 2NT as a good hand, given unfavourable vuln.

At equal vuln, I would have passed, but given the vuilnerability, I assumed N to have more defense potential, so I doubled.

 

Declarer picked the trump suit for 1 losers (he wd have done it anyway even if playing undoubled, given the announced minors in N) and conceded the A of H.

 

So let's take this hand as a starting point to define your suggestions to deal with partner's 2-suited overcalls.

I assume in the rest of the post we use Michael's cuebid and Unusual 2NT.

I know there other good methods out there (other 2 suited overcalls such as Roman or Ghestem, transfer overcalls, Meta defense, etc), but for the purpose of this post please do not start the discussion on other bidding methods: I want to focus on hand evaluation.

Thanks ! :huh:

 

We currently play MINIMAX ranges when not vuln or when at equal vuln.

MINIMAX is defined as either less than opening in HCP (say 6/-10-11) OR reverse in HCP (15/16+), since intermediate hands (11-15) will just bid the suits.

 

1) do you think defining two suiters in terms of LOSERS instead of HCP will work better ? The problem I can think of in using losers is that pard will have more trouble deciding to penalize.

 

2) what are your suggested requirements for a 2-suiters at unfavourable vulnerability? Could you opost an example hand of the worse hand that would use Michaels' or Unusual 2NT ?

 

 

3) DO YOU THINK IT IS WISE TO USE A 2 SUITED OVERCALL HAVING 65 SHAPE (ONE SUIT LONGER)? Does your opinion change on this issue whether the 65 is in

a ) the minors

b ) the majors

c ) major-minor

Make a 2 suited call either with a good hand or a poor hand playing standard. The vulnerability only means you might have an extra card in one of your suits, or some better intermediates.

 

I would expect some company with -590 here, even then 4♠ might go down on just looking at the NS cards. I'd double at IMPs, but not at MP's by the way.

 

It also looks like you are taking a bath in 5♣.

 

Playing my preferred system of Overcall Structure, all 2 suited bids are based on loser count.

[Chamaco]

Question A )

 

Could you please post the worse hand you'd overcall at UNFAVORABLE vulnerability ?

I really need concrete examples B)

 

1- 1M-(2NT) Unusual 2NT

 

2- 1m-(2m) Michaels

 

3- 1M-(2M) Major-minor 2 suiter

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Question B )

 

For those who use losers.

How many losers do you promise with a 2-suited bid at:

 

1) none vuln

2) non vuln vs vuln

3) all vuln

4) vuln vs not

[Free]

Question A is hard to tell, since I bid with all kind of garbage B)

 

Question B is a matter of the level you're going to play:

 

V 2 level: 7 losers

V 3 level: 6 losers

...

 

NV 2 level: 8 losers

NV 3 level: 7 losers

...

 

this means you need less losers for a 1♥-2♥ than for a 1♠-2♠ for example. I don't make a difference when opps are V or NV.