Advancing a 1S overcall

[gnasher]

Lead ♦3 third/fifth, to ♦8, ♦K, ♦6.

East shifts to ♥J (denying the T according to their agreements).

Win the ace and lead ♠Q. I thought this only appeared in books.

[JLOGIC]

Win the ace, play the SQ.

 

edit: lol slow pony, shoulda refreshed :(

[JLOGIC]

Why not 2♥ (♠ raise), followed by 3♥ (natural game try, forcing to 3♠)? That way you will be able to put spades and hearts in the picture and you may be able to bid 3NT should partner bid 3♠.

 

Seems to me that this way you can have your cake, eat it too and put some in the freezer.

 

Rik

 

Because you only have 2 spades and partner will think you have 3 per your agreements? I think the agreements are just flawed.

[mfa1010]

Why not 2♥ (♠ raise), followed by 3♥ (natural game try, forcing to 3♠)? That way you will be able to put spades and hearts in the picture and you may be able to bid 3NT should partner bid 3♠.

 

Seems to me that this way you can have your cake, eat it too and put some in the freezer.

 

Rik

Sounds cool :)

Maybe your suggestion is the best. But we will get out of 3N a lot, since partner will not play us for such massive clubs and only 2 spades.

 

 

Win the ace and lead ♠Q. I thought this only appeared in books.

No surprise that the forum spotted this line in seconds :)

 

 

Because you only have 2 spades and partner will think you have 3 per your agreements? I think the agreements are just flawed.

Any suggestions for improvement are most welcome. I will proceed with the thing about 2N being natural, especially when RHO passes.

[lowerline]

♠AQ

♥AQ98

♦J6

♣QJT72

 

(1♣) - 1♠ - (pass) - ?

 

None vul.

 

You have agreed to play transfer responses:

2♦ would show a heart suit, at least 5 cards.

2♥ would show 10+ with a 3-card fit.

2NT would show a 4-card fit.

 

What would you do?

 

3nt. Take away one of those queens and I would bid 2♥. Don't forget that 2♥ can also be bid with a strong hand without support (especially because a natural 2nt advance is not available).

 

Steven

 

 

 

[rhm]

3♣, 3♦, 3♥ and 4♦ would also be raises in our system. :)

 

If you have any good suggestions about system I would love to hear them.

If you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail.

If everything is a raise, it gets hard to show good hands, which cannot raise.

Seems to me like an overkill.

After a wide ranging overcall I would want a cuebid, which does not necessarily imply a fit.

Differentiating between 3 card and 4 card support is not as crucial as people believe as long as it is understood that 3 card support must have compensating values to belong in the same strength category.

3NT is an obvious bid in your system

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

I don't think you should change your methods because of one deal, especially as you had two half-reasonable options and you got to a sensible contract anyway.

 

Differentiating between 3 card and 4 card support is not as crucial as people believe as long as it is understood that 3 card support must have compensating values to belong in the same strength category.

The distinction between 3- and 4-card support is important if there is further competition. If we compare a 3-card raise and a 4-card raise of equivalent offensive strength, the 3-card raise will usually have better defence.

[Fluffy]

4♠ looks like a better contract, I read an article where someone advocated always pulling to 4M when having AK stiff as support opposite a 5 card weak hand, I don't think AQ is that different. Not that I will force it, (specially having 5 good clubs) but giving partner the option to pick it sounds reasonable.

[mfa1010]

If you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail.

If everything is a raise, it gets hard to show good hands, which cannot raise.

Seems to me like an overkill.

After a wide ranging overcall I would want a cuebid, which does not necessarily imply a fit.

Differentiating between 3 card and 4 card support is not as crucial as people believe as long as it is understood that 3 card support must have compensating values to belong in the same strength category.

3NT is an obvious bid in your system

 

Rainer Herrmann

Thanks for your thoughts. :)

 

It is not entirely clear to me what your suggested solution is.

If 2♣ could be a good 3-card raise or a good 4-card raise, but also a good hand with no fit, then it seems to me that it will be hard for overcaller to proceed or judge a competitive auction.

[jogs]

Thanks for comments (more comments are welcome :)).

 

I chose 3N but felt lousy about it. Jumping all the way from 1♠ to 3N when it so easily could be wrong felt like a beginner's bid.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saqhaq98dj6cqjt72&n=sjt982h52da98ca53&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1c1sp3nppp]266|200[/hv]

 

The contract was reasonable, though. The declaring had a fun theme as it went:

 

Lead ♦3 third/fifth, to ♦8, ♦K, ♦6.

East shifts to ♥J (denying the T according to their agreements).

 

Friendly defense by East. Doesn't diamond back at

trick 2 give you no play? Please post the entire

hand. Thank you.

[mfa1010]

West had Kxxx, Kxx, Qxx, Kxx so if they persist in diamonds, we duck once more and make it easily with clubs coming in for 5 tricks.

[gnasher]

We'd be OK if he was 3334 too. Win the third diamond and play a spade to the queen.

 

If he takes the first spade and plays ♣K, we play low.

 

If he ducks ♠K, we play ♣Q, ♣J, club to the ace, spade to the ace, club to endplay him.

[jogs]

West had Kxxx, Kxx, Qxx, Kxx so if they persist in diamonds, we duck once more and make it easily with clubs coming in for 5 tricks.

 

They should persist in diamonds. If you play carelessly you could go down.

Do you pitch a heart on the third diamond? Then what on trick 4?

Spade to queen. West wins king and play the club king to the next

trick. You must remember to duck. If you win this trick, you may

limit yourself to 5 clubs and 3 aces in the other suits.

[mgoetze]

Please post the entire hand. Thank you.

This is the Expert-Class Bridge forum. If you want problems to be simplified for you, you should hang out in the I/A forum instead.

[dake50]

What bid asks "tell me more?" Esp. min/max, 2nd suit, extra length, good controls.

Use that advancer-taking-charge bid. You designed that into your scheme, surely.

[PhilKing]

What bid asks "tell me more?" Esp. min/max, 2nd suit, extra length, good controls.

Use that advancer-taking-charge bid. You designed that into your scheme, surely.

 

 

I prefer the "tell me more" method as you suggest. I'm not convinced transfers work well after a 1M overcall. I'm toying with this scheme, which just gives up a little bit here and there, but makes all strong and invitational hands biddable.

 

After (1m)-1M-(pass):

 

1NT 8-12

2♣ 13+ no fit

2♦ fit, 9+

2M weak

2OM invitational

2NT nat GF

3m mixed raise

3om nat, inv

 

Youngsters may shudder at only having only two constructive raises available. 2♣ then new suit GF, 2♣ then 2NT inv. All other sequences obvious. So on this hand we would bid 2NT GF to check on hearts and give partner the option to insist on spades.

 

I think some Dutch pairs do something similar.

[lalldonn]

I prefer the "tell me more" method as you suggest. I'm not convinced transfers work well after a 1M overcall. I'm toying with this scheme, which just gives up a little bit here and there, but makes all strong and invitational hands biddable.

 

After (1m)-1M-(pass):

 

1NT 8-12

2♣ 13+ no fit

2♦ fit, 9+

2M weak

2OM invitational

2NT nat GF

3m mixed raise

3om nat, inv

 

Youngsters may shudder at only having only two constructive raises available. 2♣ then new suit GF, 2♣ then 2NT inv. All other sequences obvious. So on this hand we would bid 2NT GF to check on hearts and give partner the option to insist on spades.

 

I think some Dutch pairs do something similar.

Am I reading it wrong or is it impossible to bid the other minor naturally ever?

[PhilKing]

Am I reading it wrong or is it impossible to bid the other minor naturally ever?

 

om = other minor - that may be the source of confusion.

 

A jump in the other minor is natural and invitational

2♣ followed by bidding the minor is natural and game forcing

 

The hand you lose is the one that would respond 2m (natural f1) and pass partner's rebid or raise, but you can make a bent 1NT response on those against a dodgy minor opening.

[lalldonn]

I see thanks

[han]

The hand I woul lose is the non-forcing 2m bid. Seems like this bid would come up very often. I would be uncomfortable forcing to the 3-level on many hands where I would like to bid clubs.

 

Which Dutch pairs play this Phil?

[PhilKing]

The hand I woul lose is the non-forcing 2m bid. Seems like this bid would come up very often. I would be uncomfortable forcing to the 3-level on many hands where I would like to bid clubs.

 

Which Dutch pairs play this Phil?

 

I was kind of guessing, since Jack5 uses something like this. Westra maybe? But perhaps only with his computer.