Phil Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 IMPs, red / white Q6x KQ8x Q4xx 87 (1♦) - 2♣ - (pass) - ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Pass. While game is possible if partner has a very heavy overcall, there is just no call that fits this hand. 2♦ and 2NT are both overbids and could easily turn a plus (or small minus) into a minus (or larger minus). 2♥ could strike gold, but is likely to be very dangerous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 This is where you wish you could strike the "must have been made by an opponent" bit of Law 19A :) I think I'm going to have to reluctantly pass as well. The only alternative I consider is 2D but that really should have five cards. ahydra 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Pass. This hand is one of the many reasons opener should not be "required" to re-enter (usually with a double) as many posters seem to believe, although I welcome him to do so. I don't understand Ahydra's concept of what 2D would mean on the first round by advancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 I normally play advances as "encouraging but NF". I think it's the "NF" bit of that that makes me want to have five cards. Is it better to play them F1, do you think? ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 I normally play advances as "encouraging but NF". I think it's the "NF" bit of that that makes me want to have five cards. Is it better to play them F1, do you think? ahydraI think it is probably more useful to have 2D be not natural when they have opened 1D and partner has overcalled; a cuebid suggesting more than just a courtesy raise of Clubs. It is not the same as when overcaller himself bids their suit naturally on the second round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 I think it is probably more useful to have 2D be not natural when they have opened 1D and partner has overcalled; a cuebid suggesting more than just a courtesy raise of Clubs. It is not the same as when overcaller himself bids their suit naturally on the second round. UGH, I totally missed 1D there by opener! No wonder you were a bit confused... Yes, 2D would be a good club raise. OK, applying the same theory to 2H - does it promise four or five cards for you? ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 You do have some values but Pass is right. Q432 with the suit bid behind you loses some value. It may even not be stopper at NT. You have tolerance for partner's suit but not a good fit. Since partner didn't double, it's unlikely that partner has enough for game (i.e. double and bid ♣s). Partner might also have doubled instead of bidding 2 ♣ with something like ♠ Kxx ♥ Axxx ♦ x ♣ AJxxx, so there is some reduced likelihood of a ♥ fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 pass. 2nd choice would be 3♣, 3rd 2N, but both of those are very very distant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 I really hate the pass with this 9 count opposite partner's vulnerable 2 level overcall. I would bid 2NT, but 2♦ and 3♣ are also plausible. This hand is one of the many reasons opener should not be "required" to re-enter (usually with a double) as many posters seem to believe Pretty sure you won't find anyone, let alone 'many posters', who believes that opener is required to re-enter without looking at their hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Pretty sure you won't find anyone, let alone 'many posters', who believes that opener is required to re-enter without looking at their hand.I didn't think so either, until I read their posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 hes back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 hes back! He never left, he is just observing . Like you, he is also my most fav poster :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Even more favorite since he agrees with my 2N bid! I bought OK in 3N ATx JTx Q AQT9xx. Opps defended like retards but the layout saved them -200. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 I like the Q4xx, it's one of my favorite suit combinations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 The ops were probably confused when they figured out you both had the diamond queen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I really hate the pass with this 9 count opposite partner's vulnerable 2 level overcall. You and I play with really different partners, perhaps. The ones I play with like to overcall 2♣ aggressively, even vul, just to put their ops in the "awkward negative double" spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 You and I play with really different partners, perhaps. The ones I play with like to overcall 2♣ aggressively, even vul, just to put their ops in the "awkward negative double" spot. Mmm, maybe, but this sounds like one of those irregular verbs: I like to overcall 2♣ aggressively, even vul, just to put the ops in the awkward negative double spot, but he routinely makes vulnerable 2 level overcalls with his 5332 12 counts because he doesn't know any better. Anyway, just my opinion obviously, but if you play a style where you have to pass partner's vulnerable 2 level overcall at IMPs, with an ordinary 9 count for fear of getting too high, something is wrong somewhere - not only will you miss games when partner has a good hand, but you will sometimes go for numbers when he has a bad one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 The ops were probably confused when they figured out you both had the diamond queen. Stiff J in dummy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Mmm, maybe, but this sounds like one of those irregular verbs: I like to overcall 2♣ aggressively, even vul, just to put the ops in the awkward negative double spot, but he routinely makes vulnerable 2 level overcalls with his 5332 12 counts because he doesn't know any better. Anyway, just my opinion obviously, but if you play a style where you have to pass partner's vulnerable 2 level overcall at IMPs, with an ordinary 9 count for fear of getting too high, something is wrong somewhere - not only will you miss games when partner has a good hand, but you will sometimes go for numbers when he has a bad one. Calling this an ordinary 9 count is unfair imo, it is quite a poor 9 count with no ace, no club filler, no ten or 9 no fit, and not even a good diamond holding like Q98x which is obviously much better than Q432. I think considering this more like an 8 count and thus passing is pretty reasonable even though I'm with you that 9 counts should usually (almost always) be bidding over a vulnerable 2C overcall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 I am really glad that I have finally some reason to disagree with 655321, strongly even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Pretty sure you won't find anyone, let alone 'many posters', who believes that opener is required to re-enter without looking at their hand.http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_T2buuNUUNTA/TUNv1pXMNRI/AAAAAAAAEe4/uxg0OLtoNLw/s1600/expensive-tuna-fish.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 IMO more like a 7.5 to 8 count. Pass is first choice. pass is second choice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akhare Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 P -- change my holding to the other black Q and I might consider 2N or 3♣... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 This is not even a reluctant pass. This is a poor 9 count and pass is obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts