nigel_k Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=s7hjt74dq95caj832&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d2d(5-5%20clubs%20and%20either%20major)]133|200[/hv] The 2♦ overcall is 5-5 in clubs and either major. Feel free to answer according to your own preferred agreements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunnyGo Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 (edited) How would one ask about the major? Edit: misread the auction. Mentally inserted a pass. Edited June 24, 2011 by BunnyGo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveharty Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 How would one ask about the major?Turn to your left and say "Which major does your partner have?" :P Anyway I would double. I hope partner will think I want to penalize them in at least one of their suits. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted June 24, 2011 Report Share Posted June 24, 2011 I'd pass. If you double, partner will play you for a hand stronger than the one you have, and your clubs aren't even that good anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I'd pass too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 Pass, hopefully we can double 2S for takeout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 looks like opps have at least an 8 card ♠ fit. Since they are uncertain about the majors 3♦ should make it harder for the opps to find both level and strain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveharty Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I'd pass. If you double, partner will play you for a hand stronger than the one you have, and your clubs aren't even that good anyway.Maybe you're right, but unless partner is a really light opener in this position, we have at least half the deck on a possible misfit hand; isn't that the ideal time to be defending? Didn't see whether this was MP or IMPs, that might factor in my decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 looks like opps have at least an 8 card ♠ fit. Since they are uncertain about the majors 3♦ should make it harder for the opps to find both level and strain. Maybe, but maybe 3♦ will make it harder for pd to find the right level and strain as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I agree with 3♦. The opponents are playing stupid methods, so make them pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 What's so stupid about this method? It's even more well-defined than a multi and I bet you wouldn't call multi a stupid method :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 Actually even the most stupid treatments can work well especially when opps try to take genius actions against it. IF it turnes out that our pd gets excited at the end thinking we have too many ♦, i am pretty confident opps will have the same thoughts for 3♦ call, that we had for their methods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted June 25, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=s7hjt74dq95caj832&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d2d(5-5%20clubs%20and%20either%20major)p2hd(takeout)2s]133|200[/hv] Assuming you passed, this is part two. EDIT: Partner's double is for takeout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I take it pard's dbl shows hearts, so now 4♥. Pass seems to have worked well. Gotta capitalize. If I'm not sure pard has hearts I'd bid 3♦ and hope for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 Actually even the most stupid treatments can work well especially when opps try to take genius actions against it. IF it turnes out that our pd gets excited at the end thinking we have too many ♦, i am pretty confident opps will have the same thoughts for 3♦ call, that we had for their methods.I don't think 3♦ is a particularly extreme action. Partner will expect four diamonds, but Q9x and a singleton isn't so far away from that. Can you give me an example of a hand for partner where you think he'll get overexcited? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2200 Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 I'm either bidding 4H directly, or cuebiding 3S to show some raise, and ready to compete to 5H unless pd X LHO's 4S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 What's so stupid about this method? It's even more well-defined than a multi and I bet you wouldn't call multi a stupid method :PWhen you open a Multi:- You have a narrow range.- Your hand is weak, so you will rarely have game on.- You're one-suited.- The opponents haven't yet exchanged any information.- All of the opponents' bids are constructive, so it's unlikely that they can preempt you when it's your hand. When you make this 2♦ overcall:- You have a wide range (presumably).- You will often not be weak, so game is more likely.- You're two-suited. The number of tricks available with a two-suiter is more dependent on the quality of the fit than with a one-suiter.- The opponents have already exchanged some information, so there is less preemptive benefit.- The opponents have weak raises available, so they can preempt when it's your hand. And I'm not a big fan of the Multi anyway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted June 27, 2011 Report Share Posted June 27, 2011 gnasher: sorry, but not very impressed by your arguments. You didn't even touch what I think is the most negative thing of the overcall, i.e. the major-suit ambiguity. This rates to be a bit more problematic than in a multi (due to the length being 5 cards only). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 gnasher: sorry, but not very impressed by your arguments. You didn't even touch what I think is the most negative thing of the overcall, i.e. the major-suit ambiguity. This rates to be a bit more problematic than in a multi (due to the length being 5 cards only).The game is setup to give a high priority to finding a Major suit fit. So what's the point in creating Major suit ambiguity when it's unnecessary? Isn't it more useful to show at least 1 useful suit (say ♠, the best suit in the game) and leave the ambiguity for less useful suits (♥ or ♣). This is basically what "Baileys" does, in combination with unusual 2NT for the lowest suits (which usually have to play at 3-level anyway). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted June 28, 2011 Report Share Posted June 28, 2011 So what's the point in creating Major suit ambiguity when it's unnecessary? Well, it may not be unnecessary. Suppose you want to keep (1♦) 3♣ as preemptive. Then you're only left with (1♦) 2♦(1♦) 2NT to show two-suiters. If you play the 2NT overcall as majors, they you're stuck with the cue as clubs + major. You can also play it the other way around: cue = majors, 2NT = clubs + major. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 There is another way to keep 3C natural and nevertheless show specific 2-suiters... Over Opps' 1m:- 2m = wjo in a major, or spades + other minor, strong2H = both majors, weak2S = spades + other minor, weak2N = hearts and clubs, weak/strong3m = majors, strong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted June 30, 2011 Report Share Posted June 30, 2011 yuck that's a total tutti-fruti method :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.