GNT-A - II

[Phil]

r/r

 

♠void ♥AKQJT9753 ♦J3 ♣K4

 

(1♠) - ?

[dkham]

Too strong to overcall 4♥, so I'm just in favour of doubling then bidding whatever number of hearts I have to.

[aguahombre]

Too strong to overcall 4♥, so I'm just in favour of doubling then bidding whatever number of hearts I have to.

I am not sure what "bidding whatever number of hearts I have to" means, since I don't know who will be doing what. If Partner's 2-level takeout comes quietly around to me, 2H is the minimum number I "have to".

 

Really can't think of any continuation plan after doubling which will be of any use to partner, and it doesn't take any space away from the opponents...actually it adds toys they can employ. At least I know what I would be leading if 1SX is the contract.

 

Since a 2C overcall is not quite the same as a 2C opener, it seems we just have to choose some number of hearts. I choose 4, then will violate whatever and try 5 later if I "have to".

[billw55]

rage over computer hands obv

[gwnn]

I am not sure what "bidding whatever number of hearts I have to" means, since I don't know who will be doing what. If Partner's 2-level takeout comes quietly around to me, 2H is the minimum number I "have to".

 

Really can't think of any contination plan after doubling which will be of any use to partner, and it doesn't take any space away from the opponents...actually it adds toys they can employ. At least I know what I would be leading if 1SX is the contract.

 

Since a 2C overcall is not quite the same as a 2C opener, it seems we just have to choose some number of hearts. I choose 4, then will violate whatever and try 5 later if I "have to".

I guessed he meant that he would rebid 4H or even 5H if he had to, but ok it's not really what the post actually said. We will have to wait for clarification, until then the status of my upvote is tentative (although upvotes are irrevocable).

[Phil]

rage over computer hands obv

 

obv its a long KO so any freaks are due to randomness or lack thereof.

[JLOGIC]

2H

[dkham]

Yep I meant that I'll bid hearts next time, even if it has to be a high bid. Hopefully I can just bid 4♥, but even if the opponents are already at 4♠ I'll bid 5♥.

[MrAce]

I am not sure if the suggestion of starting with DBL was serious or not.

 

Whoever starts with DBL, also deserves to play 1♠ doubled imo.

 

 

I would start with 3♠, showing a long solid suit, stronger than any level of preempt hands, followed by bidding hearts, probably at 5 level if forced to. But any bid except DBL is fine for me, 2♥ 4♥ 5♥ whatever..

[billw55]

obv its a long KO so any freaks are due to randomness or lack thereof.

just some (attempted) humor Phil :)

 

As for my actual call .. 4♥ feels like a probable transfer to 4♠. Double feels wrong, although I can't quite say why. I therefore find myself in the strange position of choosing between 2♥ and 5♥.

[AlexJonson]

just some (attempted) humor Phil :)

 

As for my actual call .. 4♥ feels like a probable transfer to 4♠. Double feels wrong, although I can't quite say why. I therefore find myself in the strange position of choosing between 2♥ and 5♥.

 

For me it's either 4h or ace asking, so (ergo etc) it's 4h.

[akhare]

5♥ -- could be wrong, but it gets it off my chest and forces everyone else to guess B-)...

[aguahombre]

2H

It would be a good thing if Justin would elaborate a bit on this choice, and how he expects it might lead to a more enlightened final contract.

[Phil]

just some (attempted) humor Phil :)

 

OK, OK, it was early. I'll use that as an excuse this time :)

[rmnka447]

I'm bidding 4 ♥ to start. It might just be enough to prevent them from bidding 4 ♠. If not, I take the push to 5 ♥, if partner sits for 4 ♠.

 

I don't want to give the opponents any chance to figure out what their assets are.

[Phil]

Nine card suits generally make for good stories. I overcalled 2♥ and heard a preemptive 3♠. NO responsive double from partner so no slam. I bid 4♥ of course.

 

RHO tanks and bids 4♠. Fine. 5♥. Partner had just enough of the right stuff: xxxx, 42, AQxxx xx. I joked that I've never seen a doubleton 4 be an entry before LOL (it wasn't with the foul 2-0 trump split).

 

This was the 1st of our double game swings opf the day. At the other table my hand bid 4♥ and competed to 5. Teammate made a nice push to 5♠ on AKxxx void KTxxx Axx.

[nige1]

r/r ♠void ♥AKQJT9753 ♦J3 ♣K4

(1♠) - ?

IMO 3♠ = 10, 4♥ = 9, Pass = 8, 2♥ = 7, 3♥ = 6, 4N = 5, 6♥ = 4, 5♥ = 3, Double = 2.

I like MrAce's 3♠ because if it is our hand, then a slam may be on.

[Zelandakh]

It would be a good thing if Justin would elaborate a bit on this choice, and how he expects it might lead to a more enlightened final contract.

I think he's just walking the dog. There's no way the bidding is dying in 2♥. Phil's story shows why this is a good approach; it will often make it easier for the opps to bid on to 5♠ here if we start with 4♥ or 5♥ initially. I think the suggested alternative of 3♠ is awful - partner is going to play you for a minor suit. I have seen a couple of hands where (genuine) experts tried this and ended up with a bidding accident when partner was not in on the joke.

[phil_20686]

1337069995[/url]' post='638466']

I think he's just walking the dog. There's no way the bidding is dying in 2♥. Phil's story shows why this is a good approach; it will often make it easier for the opps to bid on to 5♠ here if we start with 4♥ or 5♥ initially. I think the suggested alternative of 3♠ is awful - partner is going to play you for a minor suit. I have seen a couple of hands where (genuine) experts tried this and ended up with a bidding accident when partner was not in on the joke.

 

Last time I over called two hearts on a nine card suit it did end the auction

[hv=pc=n&s=sak942hdkt543ct53&w=shakj976532da2c82&n=st7hqt84dj76cakj4&e=sqj8653hdq98cq976&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1s2hppp]399|300[/hv]

North apparently thought it was time to punish the junior for a poor overcall, south had learned that it was wrong to reopen a sub minimal hand itch a void. North was comically upset that he didn't get the chance to punish.2h right up until his partner showed out.

[JLOGIC]

I would say I do not walk the dog ever and consider it to basically always be a bad strategy against good players because it is so transparent. I concede it may work well vs bad players but it's still not something I do. Would it be walking the dog to open this 1H, because that's what I'd do also. I don't think anything else is appropriate so I'm bidding the minimum number of hearts and seeing what happens. Starting with 4H is possible but we could easily miss a slam that we might have bid had we given partner a chance to bid, and I feel like the chances of buying it in 4H are very low no matter what course of action I take (indeed some people are just overcalling 5H which I think is lol but it goes to show their feelings on whether we can buy it for 4H very often), so the main gain of direct 4H bids in these kind of spots is very remote with this exact hand.

 

Yes, opening 1H could be passed out, just like overcalling 2H to 1S could, but these things are basically impossible so I'm not really worried about them. It is a flaw in bidding that extreme hands like this cannot be opened 2C, and cannot double 1S, which leaves us to make non forcing bids with lots of playing strength that in practice will never get passed out. It's not like we are ever going to describe our hand anyways, in those cases gathering information before you commit to a decision is often a good idea imo.

[dkham]

I would take (1♠)-3♠ as having a long minor and asking for a spade stop to bid 3NT, bound to end in disaster when you then try and bid hearts naturally.

 

It's true that (1♠)-x might get passed out, but so might (1♠)-2♥ and at least if (1♠)-x is not passed out then you've shown the hand better.

 

If you're not going to double with this hand, is it even worth having "suited hand too strong to overcall" as one of the meanings for a takeout double?

[billw55]

I would say I do not walk the dog ever and consider it to basically always be a bad strategy against good players because it is so transparent. I concede it may work well vs bad players but it's still not something I do. Would it be walking the dog to open this 1H, because that's what I'd do also. I don't think anything else is appropriate so I'm bidding the minimum number of hearts and seeing what happens. Starting with 4H is possible but we could easily miss a slam that we might have bid had we given partner a chance to bid, and I feel like the chances of buying it in 4H are very low no matter what course of action I take (indeed some people are just overcalling 5H which I think is lol but it goes to show their feelings on whether we can buy it for 4H very often), so the main gain of direct 4H bids in these kind of spots is very remote with this exact hand.

I wondered if it was lol. On the other hand:

 

This was the 1st of our double game swings opf the day. At the other table my hand bid 4♥ and competed to 5. Teammate made a nice push to 5♠ on AKxxx void KTxxx Axx.

This is exactly why I consider 5♥. I want to make it as tough as possible for LHO to communicate their fit. Is this a more frequent need than finding slam? Beats me.

 

Would a direct 5♥ have shut out your teammate? Hard to say without the full hand, but maybe.

[Phil]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj52h96d5cqjt654&w=st983h42daq983c98&n=sak764hdkt642ca73&e=shakqjt8753dj7ck2]399|300[/hv]

 

I would think against a good partnership, North would x 5♥ and South would pull to 5♠. Hard to say.

[gszes]

there is no defense here---it seems completely misguided to

keep the bidding low either via overcall or double. We certainly

do not ever want p to x anything (and we cannot trust an x if p

does x in a competitive auction). We have a one suited 9(maybe 10) trick hand

there seems to be no reason we cannot bid

 

5h

 

which describes our hand almost perfectly at this vulnerability (9 tricks)

 

having said this the club k gives me enough to try 4s as exclusion blackwood.

If for some inexplicable reason our partnership has agreed to play this as

natural sobeit I fall back on 5h. Too many losers to try regular blackwood.

[aguahombre]

I tried (and failed) to link the vugraph record of Board 60 from the USBF semifinals. It was another example of a lower-level bid giving the opponents more subsequent problems than a higher one would have.

 

In that instance, Justin advanced pard's preempt to 6♦, giving the opps very little room; and they guessed correctly for 6♠=. At the other table, Hamman tried a fuddy-duddy 5♦ bid, and the rails popped off. With more space to maneuver, the opps found a grand, off a bullet.