Responding to Overcalla

[thebiker]

I have just read my Xmas copy of "the Complete Book on Overcalls" by Mike Lawrence (the updated version)

 

An excellent book

 

One thing puzzles me

 

(1D) 1H (1S) 2S?

 

ML says that 2S should be natural

Why is that? In the UK we would play it as cue bid raise of some sort for hearts

As ML's audience is probably North American - what is the reason fo playing 2S as natural?

Something special about the 1S bid?? A possible pysche? or??

 

Another point: nowhere as far as I can tell does ML mention Fit Jumps as possible responses to overcalls

Does this mean that in North America fit jumps are not perhaps as well known / popular as in the UK (and possibly Europe)

 

Thank you in advance for any answers

 

regards

 

Brian Keable

alias "thebiker"

[Gerben42]

Hi Brian,

 

When both opponents bid one suit, there are two cuebids available. It is a common agreement that LHO's suit is the cuebid and RHO's suit is natural, for the reason that if you sit behind the suit, it's more likely that you can play it. Compare this situation:

 

(1♣) Pass (1♥) 2♣/♥

 

This situation often comes up in 6th seat as well:

 

(1♣) Pass (1♥) 1♠

(Pass) 2♣/♥

[thebiker]

Hi Brian,

 

When both opponents bid one suit, there are two cuebids available. It is a common agreement that LHO's suit is the cuebid and RHO's suit is natural, for the reason that if you sit behind the suit, it's more likely that you can play it. Compare this situation:

 

(1♣) Pass (1♥) 2♣/♥

 

This situation often comes up in 6th seat as well:

 

(1♣) Pass (1♥) 1♠

(Pass) 2♣/♥

[thebiker]

I understand that (1C) Pass (1S) 2S is often played as natural since the 1S bid may often made on only 4 spades

 

but (1C) 1H (1S) is a different start point. Many people who play negative doubles always use double to show 4 spades , and have at least 5 spades when they come in over the overcaller, so why should 4th hand want to bid 2S as a natural bid when spades are known to be breaking rather badly

 

regards

 

Brian Keable

alias "thebiker"

[thebiker]

I understand that (1C) Pass (1S) 2S is often played as natural since the 1S bid may often made on only 4 spades

 

but (1C) 1H (1S) is a different start point. Many people who play negative doubles always use double to show 4 spades , and have at least 5 spades when they come in over the overcaller, so why should 4th hand want to bid 2S as a natural bid when spades are known to be breaking rather badly

 

regards

 

Brian Keable

alias "thebiker"

[Phil]

Bump to book reviews please!

 

Not sure how I would play this; in general a lower cue is limit and a higher cue is mixed, but here we have three (2♦, 2♠, 3♦) - edit - 2C/3C

[Siegmund]

I've not read that much of the updated Lawrence. Hmmm. Wonder what he updated, if he didn't include any fit-jumps or anything....

 

I do think that (1c) 1h (1s) 2s natural - in the "I want to play spades" sense anyway - is strange. If I wanted a to-play bid in either clubs or spades I'd prefer to have it be in clubs.

 

That said, it's true that you do have an "extra" cuebid available. After (1c) 1h (1s), you have 2C, and 2S, and 3C, all available to define as you choose. The obvious meanings are limit+ for one and mixed raise for another, but a use for the third is perhaps not so obvious. With my regular p, our agreement is 2C=limit+, while 2S=mixed raise, better spades than clubs, and 3C=mixed raise, better clubs than spades, so that when they compete at the 3-level, partner will have a feel for whether my values are more offensive or defensive. I don't consider that a standard treatment at all; it was just something we tried and liked. I would think 2S=mixed raise, 3C=fit-jump is more normal.

 

Re fit-jumps in general... many North American experts play them, but they are a well kept secret (sort of like the Obvious Shift Principle before Granovetter's book came out) -- completely absent from the intermediate-to-advanced bidding books (except for a few oblique references to passed-hand jump shift responses implying a fit), and very rarely featured in Bulletin or bridge-column hands. Many if not most intermediate players have never heard of them. Robson and Segal's book never achieved a wide circulation in the US in the mid 90s, and was unavailable at any price here for several years (ca. 2000 until it became available as an internet download.)

 

 

Edited to add: IMO it's a bidding-question thread not a book review thread and I wouldnt move it, but up to the mods to decide.