Does your overcall style have anything to do with your choice of offensive system?

[nullve]

In my case it does, because my 1-level suit overcalls are defined just so they can be weaker versions of my 1-level suit openings.

 

I can also imagine, but have no evidence to suggest, that

 

1) strong clubbers prefer narrower overcall ranges vs. standard openings than standard players;

2) strong clubbers tend to overcall strong 1C openings more/less aggressively than standard players.

 

Thoughts?

[awm]

There is some correlation, in that overall bridge experience and bidding aggressiveness can impact both. But I wouldn't say it depends on offensive system...

 

For example, my preferred defense to strong club may be different than other people's and this may well be because I have played a lot of strong club. But in my two longest term partnerships (one strong club and one standard openings) I play this same defense.

[shevek]

In a mild way.

 

Our opening method is strong club with relays.

Over 1x, responder bids the step to ask, many of the rest are non-forcing.

 

A similar style with overcalls:

(1♣) - 1♠ - (no) - ?

 

Now 2♦/♥ by advancer are constructive non-forcing.

 

2♣ is what the English (used to?) call an unassuming cue bid.

Advancer might have:

♠54 ♥KQT4 ♦AJ654 ♣64

or some strong hand or a good raise

[foobar]

In a mild way.

 

Our opening method is strong club with relays.

Over 1x, responder bids the step to ask, many of the rest are non-forcing.

 

A similar style with overcalls:

(1♣) - 1♠ - (no) - ?

 

Now 2♦/♥ by advancer are constructive non-forcing.

 

2♣ is what the English (used to?) call an unassuming cue bid.

Advancer might have:

♠54 ♥KQT4 ♦AJ654 ♣64

or some strong hand or a good raise

 

Since we are drifting off topic, isn't this situation tailor made for transfer advances of overcalls? In other words, transfers starting with the cue bid, i.e., 2♣ -> ♦, etc., ending @ 2♥ (showing a good ♠ raise; a direct raise to 2♠ is ostensibly weaker).

[shevek]

Since we are drifting off topic, isn't this situation tailor made for transfer advances of overcalls? In other words, transfers starting with the cue bid, i.e., 2♣ -> ♦, etc., ending @ 2♥ (showing a good ♠ raise; a direct raise to 2♠ is ostensibly weaker).

 

These old Rubens advances have merit. Ironic to see them now used for responses, rebids, soon maybe opening bids (if the ACBL makes that change to their charts)

Of course, you can't show the red suits, like a negative double.

 

In this auction, Joe Amsbury didn't like 2♣ as a cue raise. He wrote something like "Why let opener's red suits back in when your partner has gone to the trouble to shut them out." SO 2♥ as the raise is maybe a bit better.

[PrecisionL]

Yes, since I am a Strong Club cardophile and Canape advocate, our defensive system is similar:

 

Power Double for all hands with a good 15 hcp or more regardless of distribution.

1NT Overcall as a 3-suited takeout double with less than 15 hcp.

Roman Jump Overcalls for 2-suited hands, often 4-5 distribution.