A Big 2-Suiter

[32519]

[hv=pc=n&s=saq98632hadakqj2c&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1n(12-14%20HCP)]133|200[/hv]

What now?

[Jinksy]

The same thing we do over every weak NT question, Pinky. Double and take over the world.

 

Assuming they retreat to ♣s or ♥s (which is no certainty) and P is silent, for me forcing bids are 2N (♠s and another) and a cue of their suit (lowest two suits else stop ask). So I'll bid 2N then their suit at the four level, then punt 7♠ if P ever bids them, else prob 6♠ unless P can persuade me he has a few ♦.

 

Most awkward scenario is prob that P pulls directly to 2♣ or ♥ and takes away my option to cue. Then I'll prob bid 5N, hoping P takes it as pick a slam, and go to 7 if he bids either of my suits, else play in 6♠.

[whereagles]

5NT

 

Too many "ifs" for 7.

[MrAce]

The same thing we do over every weak NT question, Pinky. Double and take over the world.

 

Assuming they retreat to ♣s or ♥s (which is no certainty) and P is silent, for me forcing bids are 2N (♠s and another) and a cue of their suit (lowest two suits else stop ask). So I'll bid 2N then their suit at the four level, then punt 7♠ if P ever bids them, else prob 6♠ unless P can persuade me he has a few ♦.

 

Most awkward scenario is prob that P pulls directly to 2♣ or ♥ and takes away my option to cue. Then I'll prob bid 5N, hoping P takes it as pick a slam, and go to 7 if he bids either of my suits, else play in 6♠.

 

Why do you assume they will run out of NT? There are some of us who don't play pass is xfer to XX.

 

It will be embarrassing to take only 6-7 tricks in defense when you are cold for 6 ♠ or 6 ♦. If you are taking more than that in defense you are probably cold for grand.

[karlson]

If you don't have a way of showing a strong 2-suiter immediately (does anyone?), I would just start with double. Doesn't seem likely to me that it will go all pass.

[SteveMoe]

What agreements do you have in place over 1N?

 

I'd use 2N or 4N depending on what I think partner can best read.

 

5N might work assuming we play PAS, but would have to be sure partner would sit for 6♠ over their 6♣ or 6♥ when right.

Many have the agreement that 5N with 2P2P shows [one suit other than ♦. So if I show ♠ after any of partner's bids, partner knows to correct to 7♦ with the right hand.

I'd probably stare at this hand for a while if partner answers 6♦ to 5N, hearing that wag ask "What do you call a 7-card suit?" TRUMPS!!

[the hog]

"If you don't have a way of showing a strong 2-suiter immediately (does anyone?),"....of course!

Definitely NOT double.

 

2NT to start off with and wait to see how the auction progresses.

[Lord Molyb]

erghhh.. I'll do 5NT hoping partner bids something. If he bids 6 of a round suit I'll correct to spades, otherwise I'll raise to 7.

 

Of course, I never hold hands good enough for this to be a problem for me. :angry:

[akwoo]

I think an Astro 2♦ (spades and another - 54 either way or better) is perfectly fine here.

 

I raise 2♠ to 6♠ (on which partner would certainly raise with the king of trump).

 

I bid 2N (undiscussed, but surely forcing) followed by 6♦ over 2♥. I don't know whether partner will take it the same way, but I think 2N followed by 6♦ would show better spades than diamonds whereas an immediate 6♦ would show better diamonds than spades.

[the hog]

I think an Astro 2♦ (spades and another - 54 either way or better) is perfectly fine here.

 

I raise 2♠ to 6♠ (on which partner would certainly raise with the king of trump).

 

I bid 2N (undiscussed, but surely forcing) followed by 6♦ over 2♥. I don't know whether partner will take it the same way, but I think 2N followed by 6♦ would show better spades than diamonds whereas an immediate 6♦ would show better diamonds than spades.

 

As Astro is passable, I don't think an Astro 2D is a good idea.

[mike777]

edit

[32519]

[hv=d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1n(12-14%20HCP)2n(Alerted%20by%20North)p]133|100[/hv]

North alerted South's bid as -

1. Both minors, OR

2. Any big 2-suited hand

 

Does this conventional overcall have a name?

[whereagles]

Seems a logical convention. I dunno any name for it.

[Jinksy]

Why do you assume they will run out of NT? There are some of us who don't play pass is xfer to XX.

 

I'm one of them.

 

If either of them has a 5-card ♣ suit it's likely they'll pull. Meanwhile P is allowed to have a ♣ honour (esp given that, if they don't pull, I expect him to have 5+ of them) or the K♠, or even the T♦. With the latter two, we can at least theoretically make 1700, assuming the grand is on.

 

If the K♠ is in dummy, we still have a chance of taking them for 1400 instead of 980, if P has the A♣, or 800 if he has the KJ or KT and declarer the J. If declarer has it (and I can't place P with a ♦ entry), 800 is odds-on to be 1100 on the same ♣ holding.

 

Meanwhile, it's all very well wanting to be in the appropriate slam, and maybe your methods are good enough to get there without Xing, but mine will struggle. A direct 5N is almost certain to get a round-suit response from P, which leaves you guessing about whether to punt 7 (and wrongsides for a possible 1st-round ruff even if you do get there). Most other suit bids are either preemptive or undiscussed - the only other obviously forcing bids I have without Xing are 2N for the minors (probably NF since I didn't double, though it's hard to imagine P passing), and 4N.

 

Maybe I could do that and keep bidding ♠s, but it's asking a lot from P to expect him to envisage the hand I have. 4N could be some kind of A ask, or 6-6 in the minors - even if I knew and knew my P knew, I cant imagine wanting to bid it.

[akwoo]

As Astro is passable, I don't think an Astro 2D is a good idea.

 

Partner is not very likely to have the 6 diamonds that he or she should have to pass the astro 2♦ bid. I'd be more worried if my minor suit was clubs.

[MrAce]

I'm one of them.

 

If either of them has a 5-card ♣ suit it's likely they'll pull. Meanwhile P is allowed to have a ♣ honour (esp given that, if they don't pull, I expect him to have 5+ of them) or the K♠, or even the T♦. With the latter two, we can at least theoretically make 1700, assuming the grand is on.

 

If the K♠ is in dummy, we still have a chance of taking them for 1400 instead of 980, if P has the A♣, or 800 if he has the KJ or KT and declarer the J. If declarer has it (and I can't place P with a ♦ entry), 800 is odds-on to be 1100 on the same ♣ holding.

 

Meanwhile, it's all very well wanting to be in the appropriate slam, and maybe your methods are good enough to get there without Xing, but mine will struggle. A direct 5N is almost certain to get a round-suit response from P, which leaves you guessing about whether to punt 7 (and wrongsides for a possible 1st-round ruff even if you do get there). Most other suit bids are either preemptive or undiscussed - the only other obviously forcing bids I have without Xing are 2N for the minors (probably NF since I didn't double, though it's hard to imagine P passing), and 4N.

 

Maybe I could do that and keep bidding ♠s, but it's asking a lot from P to expect him to envisage the hand I have. 4N could be some kind of A ask, or 6-6 in the minors - even if I knew and knew my P knew, I cant imagine wanting to bid it.

 

-If you think they will run out, why are you wasting time with double. If they don't run your pd will. Suppose pd bid clubs or hearts, which is very likely, good luck with expressing 2 suiter of this scale.

 

-If nobody runs, you cash first 6 tricks and end up looking at your AQxxxxx suit. It is likely that they can score ♠K + 2-3-4-5 club tricks.

 

Sorry, double seems to me the worst of all.

[the hog]

Partner is not very likely to have the 6 diamonds that he or she should have to pass the astro 2♦ bid. I'd be more worried if my minor suit was clubs.

 

Not likely, but possible. Why play joke bridge?

Bidding Astro here is almost as bad a as doubling.

[Zelandakh]

If you don't have a way of showing a strong 2-suiter immediately (does anyone?)

The traditional meaning of a 2NT overcall was a GF 2-suiter and it is is still played at some levels. Playing Multi-Landy it is possible to include these hands within the 2♦ overcall in exactly the same way as strong hands can be bundled into an opening bid 2♦ multi.

 

 

Bidding Astro here is almost as bad a as doubling.

Is it? I have seen often enough from very good players that with such strong 2-suiters it is often better to start with a 2-suited overcall than a double. Here you are protected by it being even more unlikely than usual that partner will pass. In addition, the sequences (1NT) - 2♦ - 2♥; 3♠ and (1NT) - 2♦ - 2♥; 3NT are available to show GF hands with ♠+♣ and ♠+♦ respectively if you agree to this. So this can certainly work out as a general agreement.

 

Given that you reject X and 2♦, what is your choice here if playing the variant in which 2NT shows the minors? We have to do something!

[the hog]

The traditional meaning of a 2NT overcall was a GF 2-suiter and it is is still played at some levels. Playing Multi-Landy it is possible to include these hands within the 2♦ overcall in exactly the same way as strong hands can be bundled into an opening bid 2♦ multi.

 

 

 

Is it? I have seen often enough from very good players that with such strong 2-suiters it is often better to start with a 2-suited overcall than a double. Here you are protected by it being even more unlikely than usual that partner will pass. In addition, the sequences (1NT) - 2♦ - 2♥; 3♠ and (1NT) - 2♦ - 2♥; 3NT are available to show GF hands with ♠+♣ and ♠+♦ respectively if you agree to this. So this can certainly work out as a general agreement.

 

Given that you reject X and 2♦, what is your choice here if playing the variant in which 2NT shows the minors? We have to do something!

 

Unlikely does not mean impossible, does it? Would you bid the same way if your M suit was hearts?

[the hog]

The traditional meaning of a 2NT overcall was a GF 2-suiter and it is is still played at some levels. Playing Multi-Landy it is possible to include these hands within the 2♦ overcall in exactly the same way as strong hands can be bundled into an opening bid 2♦ multi.

 

 

 

Is it? I have seen often enough from very good players that with such strong 2-suiters it is often better to start with a 2-suited overcall than a double. Here you are protected by it being even more unlikely than usual that partner will pass. In addition, the sequences (1NT) - 2♦ - 2♥; 3♠ and (1NT) - 2♦ - 2♥; 3NT are available to show GF hands with ♠+♣ and ♠+♦ respectively if you agree to this. So this can certainly work out as a general agreement.

 

Given that you reject X and 2♦, what is your choice here if playing the variant in which 2NT shows the minors? We have to do something!

 

As 2nt is a big 2 suited, what's the problem?

[ggwhiz]

I play transfers over weak notrumps just so a hand like this has a second chance. (Unless pard has 6+ hearts and a spade void :o)

 

Without them 2nt stands out.

[Jinksy]

-If you think they will run out, why are you wasting time with double. If they don't run your pd will. Suppose pd bid clubs or hearts, which is very likely, good luck with expressing 2 suiter of this scale.

 

Because it communicates something honest about my hand, unlike any other call. As Zel said, we have to do something, and other than inventing a convention mid-auction to have 2N show minors or any possible two-suiter, I'm not sure what my better alternative is.

 

-If nobody runs, you cash first 6 tricks and end up looking at your AQxxxxx suit. It is likely that they can score ♠K + 2-3-4-5 club tricks.

 

I discussed this in my last comment. If no-one runs (very unlikely, even before accounting for the possibility that they're playing a forcing pass by responder), I have IMO slightly worse expectation than from a direct 5N bid. If they do run, I have a much better chance of finding (the right) grand.

[Zelandakh]

As 2nt is a big 2 suited, what's the problem?

If 2NT were to have this meaning then the hand is pointless to post, so assume for the sake of argument that you have a client who insists on playing 2NT as showing both minors. Now what?

[MrAce]

If 2NT were to have this meaning then the hand is pointless to post, so assume for the sake of argument that you have a client who insists on playing 2NT as showing both minors. Now what?

 

 

6♠ and previous similar topics but was a problem on the leading point of view suggests that this bid will receive a trump lead http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

 

Imho 7♠ bid is better than double btw.

 

Good luck to those who tries to bid a 7-5 1 loser hand scientifically, after they opened 1 NT, + having no agreement.

[the hog]

Because it communicates something honest about my hand, unlike any other call. As Zel said, we have to do something, and other than inventing a convention mid-auction to have 2N show minors or any possible two-suiter, I'm not sure what my better alternative is.

 

 

 

I discussed this in my last comment. If no-one runs (very unlikely, even before accounting for the possibility that they're playing a forcing pass by responder), I have IMO slightly worse expectation than from a direct 5N bid. If they do run, I have a much better chance of finding (the right) grand.

 

Well it is a pity for you that YOU have to invent a convention like this. Others who discuss sequences with their partners already play 2NT as any big 2 suiter.

Just a question - personally I don't necessarily see anyone running after a double, and after you have cashed your Ds, what are you going to do? Lead the SA to hold declarer to 6 tricks? Perhaps you might consider initially underleading your Ds to get pd to put a S through, if he can guess to do so? Seriously, the double is absurd.