Overcalling with 4-card major and 5-card minor.

[han]

You hold AJxx x xx KQJxxx, RHO opens 1D. What's your call?

 

Overcalling 2C would be the choice of most people, but this is dangerous: you may lose the spade suit. Some people use an artificial 1NT overcall here to solve this problem. Raptor 1NT (or Polish 1NT) shows an unbid 4-card major and an unbid 5+ minor. If you play this convention then an overcall in a minor (almost) denies a 4-card major.

 

However, in my experience it is a big sacrifice to give up on the natural 1NT overcall. Some proponents of raptor say that one of it's good features is that you cannot overcall 1NT anymore with those dangerous flat hands, but I think this is not true. Especially against light openers, you cannot afford to pass first as you can easily miss game, and to double with all 15+ balanced hands is also unattractive.

 

Giving up on Michaels

 

We choose to give up on some 2-suited hands instead, here is the structure over their 1C opening:

 

2C: 4+ spades and 5+ diamonds, intermediate or better.

2D: 4+ hearts and 5+ diamonds, intermediate.

2NT: 2 lowest unbid suits

3C: spades plus hearts, highly distributional, either weak or strong.

With a 5-card major we usually make a simple overcall.

 

The structure over 1D is similar, 2D would show 4+ spades and 5+ clubs and 2H would show 4+ hearts and 5+ clubs.

 

Over their major suit opening we play that a cuebid shows 4+ in the other major and 5+ clubs. With the other major and 5+ diamonds we double and use equal level conversion.

 

The advantages are:

 

1) Overcalling in a minor denies a 4-card major.

2) We are still able to use the natural 1NT overcall.

3) We immediately know both the major and the minor.

3) The cuebid is more preemptive than a 1NT overcall.

 

Disadvantages:

 

a) We lose the ability to show some 2-suited hands at the 2-level. Instead, we often have to double with the two highest suits.

:lol: We lose the cheapest weak jump overcall over their minor suit overcall.

c) Maybe more?

 

What do you think, is this a good idea? We have only been playing this for about a month, is there anybody who has more experience with similar methods?

[TimG]

Another option is to simply overcall 1♠. I believe Miles has a discussion of this type of hand in one of his more recent books, perhaps "Bidding in the 21stCentury"?

[mike777]

You hold AJxx x xx KQJxxx, RHO opens 1D. What's your call?

 

Overcalling 2C would be the choice of most people, but this is dangerous: you may lose the spade suit. Some people use an artificial 1NT overcall here to solve this problem. Raptor 1NT (or Polish 1NT) shows an unbid 4-card major and an unbid 5+ minor. If you play this convention then an overcall in a minor (almost) denies a 4-card major.

 

However, in my experience it is a big sacrifice to give up on the natural 1NT overcall. Some proponents of raptor say that one of it's good features is that you cannot overcall 1NT anymore with those dangerous flat hands, but I think this is not true. Especially against light openers, you cannot afford to pass first as you can easily miss game, and to double with all 15+ balanced hands is also unattractive.

 

Giving up on Michaels

 

We choose to give up on some 2-suited hands instead, here is the structure over their 1C opening:

 

2C: 4+ spades and 5+ diamonds, intermediate or better.

2D: 4+ hearts and 5+ diamonds, intermediate.

2NT: 2 lowest unbid suits

3C: spades plus hearts, highly distributional, either weak or strong.

With a 5-card major we usually make a simple overcall.

 

The structure over 1D is similar, 2D would show 4+ spades and 5+ clubs and 2H would show 4+ hearts and 5+ clubs.

 

Over their major suit opening we play that a cuebid shows 4+ in the other major and 5+ clubs. With the other major and 5+ diamonds we double and use equal level conversion.

 

The advantages are:

 

1) Overcalling in a minor denies a 4-card major.

2) We are still able to use the natural 1NT overcall.

3) We immediately know both the major and the minor.

3) The cuebid is more preemptive than a 1NT overcall.

 

Disadvantages:

 

a) We lose the ability to show some 2-suited hands at the 2-level. Instead, we often have to double with the two highest suits.

:lol: We lose the cheapest weak jump overcall over their minor suit overcall.

c) Maybe more?

 

What do you think, is this a good idea? We have only been playing this for about a month, is there anybody who has more experience with similar methods?

What range do you show for all of these overcalls NV and Vul?

How does P advance?

How show 3 or 4 support?

In some auctions you may play in 5-2 minor at 3 level?

[luke warm]

yes, you can overcall 1S, but i wouldn't with this hand... i'd overcall 2C (unless playing raptor)... if we lose the spade suit (this time), we lose it...

 

the structure hannie posted looks good.. i don't like the idea of losing the majors, though..

[Flame]

Another option is to simply overcall 1♠.  I believe Miles has a discussion of this type of hand in one of his more recent books, perhaps "Bidding in the 21stCentury"?

I think this is a mistake, im not saying its never right to bid 1s with 4 card when you have 5 card minor(didnt notice it was 6 till after i submited), but this cant be the right hand, the potential of a spade contract in 4-3 fit is very poor, while other contracts in club or nt could be much better.

In genenral when i overcall in 4 card suit i want the other suit to contain quick tricks, because i cant count on being able to draw trumps.

Imagine partner having this hand

Qxx xxxx xxx xxx

You will make 8 tricks in club, you will make about 3 tricks in spade

[TimG]

Imagine partner having this hand

Qxx xxxx xxx xxx

You will make 8 tricks in club, you will make about 3 tricks in spade

I bet you make more than 3 tricks in spades. But really: who cares how many tricks we take in 1♠? The opponents can make a variety of games and might even be on for slam.

[HeartA]

I think major suits are over-emphasized these days. On other threads of 2/1 topic, when we talk about negative dbl, some players tend to ignore minors. I don't see any problems here to simply over-call 2♣. If pd has some strength and has game interest, we can find ♠ fit later.

[pclayton]

Hans:

 

your dilemma has already been solved:

 

http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/system/foutnote.txt

 

I play all of it except for the garbage 1 level overcalls and the strong 3 level stuff.

 

It is very effective. Try it, you'll like it.

 

your ideas are OK, but its a little silly to play a 2♠ cue over 1♠ to show 4 hearts and 5 clubs, isn't it?

 

You won't miss the natural 1N overcall one iota. Power doubles are much better.

[Flame]

Imagine partner having this hand

Qxx xxxx xxx xxx

You will make 8 tricks in club, you will make about 3 tricks in spade

I bet you make more than 3 tricks in spades. But really: who cares how many tricks we take in 1♠? The opponents can make a variety of games and might even be on for slam.

I knew you wouldnt stand it ;)

This was just a way to show you how much more potential the hand has in club then in spade,(isolating other factors) sure in practice you will only play if you add few hcp to our hands, but the potential different will still be there even if its shrink a little.

And yes with some luck you might even take 4 tricks B)

[han]

Hans:

 

your dilemma has already been solved:

 

http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/system/foutnote.txt

 

I play all of it except for the garbage 1 level overcalls and the strong 3 level stuff.

 

It is very effective. Try it, you'll like it.

 

your ideas are OK, but its a little silly to play a 2♠ cue over 1♠ to show 4 hearts and 5 clubs, isn't it?

 

You won't miss the natural 1N overcall one iota. Power doubles are much better.

Thanks for the good link. Perhaps I'll get around to playing power doubles and the rest of this structure sometime too.

[Winstonm]

In my experience with defensive bidding the priority is to get the best result possible and not the best possible result so I don't believe in getting too fancy and trying to come up with bids to show every conceivable holding.

 

With the hand in question a simple 2C seems sufficient - the bidding does not rate to die here so I will have an opportunity later, if it seems wise, to further clarify my holdings.

 

If my partner happens to hold Q10xxxx, xxx, x, xxx and it is passed out, I would quickly grab my hat and make for the door as the opponents are too tough for me or else the deal is rigged. :blink:

 

WinstonM

[han]

In my experience, deals with a 4-card major and a 5+ minor come up over and over again. If you have no way to show these hands then you will have problems on almost every session. If your overcall in a minor denies a four card major then you are ahead almost every time you make such an overcall, see for instant my recent thread where I overcalled 1D over 1C and partner responded 1S.

[jahol]

I think that this "Polish NT" works fairly well. It helped me many times. It is not only the question of showing major and minor at the same time, it is also a matter of showing the hand WITHOUT major suit with 2cl/dia bid.

 

Loosing "natural" 1NT call is not that bad, in my experience. You can make "strong" double most of the times continuing with 1NT call, if you have 16+ and you are allowed to do so. And sometimes, you may be very lucky, you did not make 1NT call since that could have costed 500 or 800 whereas, after your unclear dynamic double, the opponents made partscore contract only, or, more probably, went down playing on their own.

 

Jah

[keylime]

I overcall 1S happily know my pard will not hang me. Furthermore I don't overcall five card minors normally and I want to get the spade suit in play. If it gets doubled and left in, then I can bid 2C knowing pard didn't raise me.

[awm]

I've played a similar structure from a book by Max Hardy for quite some time. Basically:

 

Cuebid = 4 cards in top suit, 5+ in bottom suit

Lowest minor/minor jump = 4 cards in hearts, 5+ in bottom suit

 

I've found that this works extremely well, except that the auction 1♦-3♣ can be a bit awkward. Four card major plus longer minor hands are extremely common and being able to deal with these is a big win. Losing michaels rarely seems to cost; we generally overcall in spades and rebid hearts later (level permitting) with those hands.

 

......

 

 

About the "overcall structure" suggested by Phil Clayton, I've never really understood this method. I've played against it many times and rarely received below average results. It seems to me that you lose a LOT, in exchange for very little... in particular:

 

Weak jump overcalls, especially over standard 1-minor openings (and precision diamond) can be very useful. Often opponents fail to compete in a minor suit fit to the proper level, or are forced to guess whether to play 3nt or 4-major, or overbid to a four-level contract when responder is stuck with an "in-between" hand of around 10-11 points and a suit of his own. Overcall structure seems to lose these.

 

Natural 1NT overcall frequently buys the contract. Most often it will be the case that points are fairly evenly divided, and opponents cannot find a 4-4 side-suit fit. Doubling loses this. Admittedly you are "safer" from being doubled in 1NT, but this is an infrequent result. The "ability" to double at the one level for penalty in a suit after the power double rarely profits. And opener's side is free to play transfers over the double, since the "business" redouble is of even rarer use.

 

It's rarely the case that doubling for penalty at the one level turns a profit, but at the two level it's a bit more frequent. The 1NT overcall starts our auction one level higher, inviting the opponents to hit for penalty on a misfit hand where they hold most of the values -- playing "standard" methods the 1NT bidder might've passed or we might've bid our suit at the one level after a takeout double and thereby escaped.

 

Finally, it's more difficult to judge our own penalty doubles. Playing matchpoints, suppose the auction begins 1 club - 1NT (takeout) - 2 club - 2 heart - 3 club, passed back to advancer. If advancer holds 3424 shape with moderate values (say 8-10 hcp), he knows that the law has probably been outcompeted (likely 1NT bidder has 1 club and 3-4 heart). But should he double or pass? If partner has a six-count, it could easily be that opponents have nine tricks and we have 7.. in fact this is a quite probable result. Best to pass and hope they have missed 3nt. But if the 1NT bidder has 13-14 points, it could quite easily be our hand. Opponents are likely to have 8 or even 7 tricks, and 2h was probably making -- it's quite possible we MUST double to attain a good result. Even worse, what if the 1NT bidder has a six-card spade suit? Now it is quite possible that we have a NINE card fit, and 3c and 3s could BOTH be making, but we will never uncover this. I just don't see how we've "won" in this auction -- a standard takeout double guarantees some defensive values (so we can double) and normally denies substantial length in some side suit (so no uncovered 9-card spade fits). Note that even if we buy the auction in 2h, we may play a 4-3 fit instead of a 6-3 fit, probably a poor matchpoint result.

 

I just don't get it... perhaps one of this method's advocates can explain better? It seems like the only real wins of this method would be opponents who haven't discussed how to defend against it, and botch their subsequent auctions.

[mikestar]

I've played a similar structure from a book by Max Hardy for quite some time. Basically:

 

Cuebid = 4 cards in top suit, 5+ in bottom suit

Lowest minor/minor jump = 4 cards in hearts, 5+ in bottom suit

 

I've found that this works extremely well, except that the auction 1♦-3♣ can be a bit awkward. Four card major plus longer minor hands are extremely common and being able to deal with these is a big win. Losing michaels rarely seems to cost; we generally overcall in spades and rebid hearts later (level permitting) with those hands.

 

I've played the Hardy method with one amendment: over 1D the 4H, 5+ C hand bids 2H rather than 3C. Leaves more space for constructive bidding and if we have to give up a preemptive jump overcall, let's give up the cheapest one.

[pclayton]

I've played a similar structure from a book by Max Hardy for quite some time. Basically:

 

Cuebid = 4 cards in top suit, 5+ in bottom suit

Lowest minor/minor jump = 4 cards in hearts, 5+ in bottom suit

 

I've found that this works extremely well, except that the auction 1♦-3♣ can be a bit awkward. Four card major plus longer minor hands are extremely common and being able to deal with these is a big win. Losing michaels rarely seems to cost; we generally overcall in spades and rebid hearts later (level permitting) with those hands.

 

......

 

 

About the "overcall structure" suggested by Phil Clayton, I've never really understood this method. I've played against it many times and rarely received below average results. It seems to me that you lose a LOT, in exchange for very little... in particular:

 

Weak jump overcalls, especially over standard 1-minor openings (and precision diamond) can be very useful. Often opponents fail to compete in a minor suit fit to the proper level, or are forced to guess whether to play 3nt or 4-major, or overbid to a four-level contract when responder is stuck with an "in-between" hand of around 10-11 points and a suit of his own. Overcall structure seems to lose these.

 

Natural 1NT overcall frequently buys the contract. Most often it will be the case that points are fairly evenly divided, and opponents cannot find a 4-4 side-suit fit. Doubling loses this. Admittedly you are "safer" from being doubled in 1NT, but this is an infrequent result. The "ability" to double at the one level for penalty in a suit after the power double rarely profits. And opener's side is free to play transfers over the double, since the "business" redouble is of even rarer use.

 

It's rarely the case that doubling for penalty at the one level turns a profit, but at the two level it's a bit more frequent. The 1NT overcall starts our auction one level higher, inviting the opponents to hit for penalty on a misfit hand where they hold most of the values -- playing "standard" methods the 1NT bidder might've passed or we might've bid our suit at the one level after a takeout double and thereby escaped.

 

Finally, it's more difficult to judge our own penalty doubles. Playing matchpoints, suppose the auction begins 1 club - 1NT (takeout) - 2 club - 2 heart - 3 club, passed back to advancer. If advancer holds 3424 shape with moderate values (say 8-10 hcp), he knows that the law has probably been outcompeted (likely 1NT bidder has 1 club and 3-4 heart). But should he double or pass? If partner has a six-count, it could easily be that opponents have nine tricks and we have 7.. in fact this is a quite probable result. Best to pass and hope they have missed 3nt. But if the 1NT bidder has 13-14 points, it could quite easily be our hand. Opponents are likely to have 8 or even 7 tricks, and 2h was probably making -- it's quite possible we MUST double to attain a good result. Even worse, what if the 1NT bidder has a six-card spade suit? Now it is quite possible that we have a NINE card fit, and 3c and 3s could BOTH be making, but we will never uncover this. I just don't see how we've "won" in this auction -- a standard takeout double guarantees some defensive values (so we can double) and normally denies substantial length in some side suit (so no uncovered 9-card spade fits). Note that even if we buy the auction in 2h, we may play a 4-3 fit instead of a 6-3 fit, probably a poor matchpoint result.

 

I just don't get it... perhaps one of this method's advocates can explain better? It seems like the only real wins of this method would be opponents who haven't discussed how to defend against it, and botch their subsequent auctions.

I'm in a bit of a rush this morning, but here's a few reasons why Overcall Structure works real well:

 

1. Roman Jump Overcalls and cue bids bring the higher ranking suit into play immediately. Hands like this have no solution playing standard. Hardy methods are OK, but the 1♦ - 3♣ auction is very cumbersome. And Hardy doesn't have a good system for very strong two-suited hands either.

 

2. 1N overcalls for takeout are not a lot different than light takeout doubles. We use caution and pay a lot of attention to vulnerability and if the hand doesn't have good texture. We take away the 1 level for everyone at the table. Raptor also loses the natural 1N overcall; those that play Raptor don't miss the natural 1N overcall at all.

 

Lets say the hand over the opener has the choice between a light takeout double and a natural 1N overcall. If partner is bust, which hand would you rather scramble out at the two level? In response to Adam's competitive auction, the 1N bidder can make a cooperative double to show a max. Responder will jump to 3♥ with a 5 card suit and normal to good ODR, so opener will be well placed to double, raise or pass.

 

3. Power doubles don't come up that often, but when they do, they are very effective. One of the biggest advantages is positional. I've never seen a situation where it isn't best to have the opening bidder on lead leading up to the weak hand. Basic suit combinations like Jx opposite AQx turn into triple stoppers instead of double stops. Frankly its an illusion playing transfers in response to a natural 1N overcall anyway.

 

Several times a year we nail the opponents at the one level. Its not a big deal, but if you play 5 card majors, opening a 3 card minor can and should be occasionally penalized. Power doubles also allow us to play at the one level when partner is bust, as mentioned above, instead of playing a hopeless 1N x'd.

 

Overall, one of the premises of OS is to get into the auction early, instead of waiting and letting the opponents find their fit. Is it really safer to balance at the 3 level, than coming in cheaper at the one or two level?

 

Bigger payoffs occur when we do find a fit at a low level. We can frequently bid the immediate total tricks even before Opener has a 2nd call in the auction.

 

Do we get silly results? Of course. I played a silly 3-3 fit a few weeks ago on a total misfit.

 

Do we get our heads handed to us? Sometimes, but not as often as you might think.

 

We lose the normal weak jump overcall. Sometimes we have to push a little and bid the hand at the 3 level to preempt, or just make a simple overcall. Occasionally this works against us as well.

[han]

I've played the Hardy method with one amendment: over 1D the 4H, 5+ C hand bids 2H rather than 3C. Leaves more space for constructive bidding and if we have to give up a preemptive jump overcall, let's give up the cheapest one.

Ah, glad to see that my partner and I have good company.

[Fluffy]

Hannie you have also sacrificed the antural 2♣ overcall, and the problem its that despite you can still bid 1♠ with the michael's hand and lose few, with a 12-19 ♣ 1 suiter you have come to no possible bid at all.

[han]

True, if the opponents open in our suit then we have a problem.

[P_Marlowe]

Another option is to simply overcall 1♠. I believe Miles has a discussion of this type of hand in one of his more recent books, perhaps "Bidding in the 21stCentury"?

But AJxx is not his proposed suit quality strength,

at least if you have the alternative KQxxxx.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[inquiry]

I've been a little hesitant to put down what Misho and I have agreed to play. We use a distorted raptor. Basically, our agreement is as follows.

 

1suit-2suit --> Still michaels, but we show specfically top two unbid suits.

1suit-2NT --> Still unusual, shows specifically the bottom two suits.

 

1suit-1NT --> Altered raptor. Either, four in an unbid major and 5+ in a minor, or, five plus in the top unbid su it and five plus in the bottom unbid suit. We use this bid with 5-5 only when we are willing to bid again... bidding the top suit. This second bid then locks in the lower suit as being held too.

 

So with Hannie's hand:

You hold AJxx x xx KQJxxx, RHO opens 1D. What's your call?

 

I overcall 1NT like any other "raptor guy". I might have hearts or spades.

 

But where Hannie would use

  2C: 4+ spades and 5+ diamonds, intermediate or better,

 

I simply bid 1NT, and if I bid 2♣, I strongly tend to deny four spades or four hearts.

 

And where hannie bids

  2D: 4+ hearts and 5+ diamonds, intermediate.

 

I don't have a bid to show 5+ in the suit they opened. So here, I assume they opened 1♣ and the jump to 2♦ shows this (I admit to being confused). I still use 1NT.

 

The cue-bid over the major seems to be overly damaging to your chances if you belong in hearts (for instance, they play (1S)=2S shows 4 hearts and long clubs. If you belong in hearts, you can't stop short of three which might be two or three levels too high. Also, you can't overcall 2♥ natural, as that shows four hearts but five plus diamonds.

 

It seems too convoluted to me. Sometimes I actually want to bid 2♣, or 2♦, or 2♥ natural. So I would place a huge DISADVANTAGE on the ability to make a natural two level overcall (2♣ over 1♦, or 2♥ over 1♠) (But again, maybe it has to be a jump to 2♠ over 1♥).

 

Anyway, I am very happy with this altered raptor. We include this when both oppoenents have bid as well....

 

(1D)-P-(1S)-?

 

Of course we play takeout double (sort of balanced, but for other suits)

1NT - takeout other two suits, emphais on lower suit, 4-5 or 4-6 likely

2NT - good distribution takeout for other suits

Cue-bid = natural here (we play cue-bids on these sequences as natural).

 

Ben