What action to take with 4-5 majors

[phoenix214]

There are mutiple ways, how to bid a hand with 9 cards in majors over a 1 of a minor opening, you can overcall, dbl or try a light michaels.

So here is hand that came up, and the question is what would be you prefered action: Favorable in imps versus good opponents: RHO opens 1♦ which is 4+ and natural and you hold:

♠:AQ32

♥:A9743

♦:6

♣:J65

 

And as a follow up question: What is our plan if LHO raises diamonds to 2 and 3 and it gets passed around to us?

[MrAce]

1♥ followed by DBL.

[wank]

i double with minimums (less than 13 or 14ish) and bid the 5 then double with modest extras (13 or 14ish+)

[rmnka447]

If you double an then bid ♥ later on, you're advertising a STRONG overcall. If you bid ♥, you may lose a ♠ fit. But if it's passed around to you at fairly low level, you have the option to make a reopening double. If you double, you might lose a heart fit.

 

My gut reaction was to double, but the more I think about it, I think 1 ♥ is right. It allows partner more options depending on your bidding agreements over overcalls. If partner forces with a ♦ cue, you can bid 2 ♠ to show an opening hand. If partner somehow finds a ♠ bid, you really like your hand and will Take some raising action whether the new suit bid is NF, Constructive NF, or Forcing.

 

If 2 ♦ (weak) raise is passed back, I'll make the reopening double, but would probably pass 3 ♦ back to me.

[ggwhiz]

If you double an then bid ♥ later on, you're advertising a STRONG overcall.

 

Exactly why I prefer a 1♥ overcall so I can usually take further action. If I double I might as well fold my cards and put them in my pocket. That said, after 3♦ passed back to me I'm out if it's limit otherwise I'm doubling.

[nullve]

There are mutiple ways, how to bid a hand with 9 cards in majors over a 1 of a minor opening, you can overcall, dbl or try a light michaels.

So here is hand that came up, and the question is what would be you prefered action: Favorable in imps versus good opponents: RHO opens 1♦ which is 4+ and natural and you hold:

♠:AQ32

♥:A9743

♦:6

♣:J65

Standard bidders sometimes lose a 4-4 S fit after

 

(1♦)-1♥-(P)-1N

 

because Advancer thinks/fears that a 1♠ advance would promise 5+ S; or a 5-3 H fit after

 

(1♦)-X-(P)-1N,

 

because a 2♥ rebid would not show a Flannery-type hand, but be strong.

 

I don't know what's best of X and 1♥ when playing with a pick-up partner, but in my regular partnerships I've always made sure that

 

(1m)-1R-(P)-1M = 4+ M, F1,

 

partly in order to solve problems like this. So with those partners: 1♥.

 

And as a follow up question: What is our plan if LHO raises diamonds to 2 and 3 and it gets passed around to us?

X (takeout)

[gszes]

The heart suit is nothing to write home about. With this particular collection I prefer x. Change the HCP around some Axxx AQJxx x xxx and 1h suddenly looks a ton better since it provides not only a decent landing spot but a good lead director.

[neilkaz]

The heart suit is nothing to write home about. With this particular collection I prefer x. Change the HCP around some Axxx AQJxx x xxx and 1h suddenly looks a ton better since it provides not only a decent landing spot but a good lead director.

 

I agree with you although the others make good arguments for 1♥.

[Trinidad]

I agree with you although the others make good arguments for 1♥.

But do you really want partner to give a false preference to 3♥ when he has some junk with two hearts?

 

That is the reason why I would double:

- If we can make game because partner has three card heart support, he will be so strong that he will come to life and force me to suggest hearts.

- If we can make game because of our fit in the major, partner will be able to judge the situation immediately because I have shown both majors.

- But if we can't make game, I certainly don't want to force partner beyond the 1 level.

 

This hand is worth only one action, either double or overcall, and -to my taste- the double is more descriptive, for the reasons above. For an overcall, followed by a double, I need a slightly better hand and suit. (And for a double followed by an overcall, I need a lot more.)

 

Rik

[aguahombre]

Exactly why I prefer a 1♥ overcall so I can usually take further action. If I double I might as well fold my cards and put them in my pocket.

I agree with all the above reasoning and come to the opposite conclusion. I don't have enough goods to take further action, even after a simple weak single raise comes back to me. So, I double and fold my cards, putting them into my pocket -- having shown somewhere around opening strength with support for the other 3 suits.

 

Trinidad was more eloquent in this view.

[cartruck]

I think that hand is weak enough to use Michael's and bid 2♦. Best desrcibes your hand quickly and if partner bids clubs you do have 3 of them. I would definitely bid 2♦ showing both Majors there.

 

EDIT: My father (usually the only partner I ever play with) and I use Michael's and even Unusual 2NT with 4-4 distribution, rarely, but that is in play and we respond accordingly.

[Phil]

Slightly prefer double. Weaken the hand and its 1!h. Strengthen it and its a clear x.

[Winstonm]

With a minimum hand, surely double showing your 3 places to play is better than the unilateral 1H, especially with the weak heart suit? In my youth, I would overcall 1H and invariably the next bid I would hear was 3D or some number of NT when I really wasn't keen on a heart lead.

[Cyberyeti]

With a minimum hand, surely double showing your 3 places to play is better than the unilateral 1H, especially with the weak heart suit? In my youth, I would overcall 1H and invariably the next bid I would hear was 3D or some number of NT when I really wasn't keen on a heart lead.

 

Equally you double and partner with KJ, KQx, xxx, xxxxx bids clubs and they cash 3 clubs and 3 diamonds when 3♥ was cold.

 

It's not an easy problem, to some extent it depends what you overcall on, for us this would be absolutely minimum for 1♥ over 1♦ which cuts nothing out, and partner responds to it like an opening bid so the spade suit doesn't get buried, but this is very much a fringe treatment.

 

I'd overcall 1♥ and x not necessarily showing extras if some number of diamonds comes back to me

[Kaitlyn S]

That is the reason why I would double:

- If we can make game because partner has three card heart support, he will be so strong that he will come to life and force me to suggest hearts.

But you can't suggest five hearts.

 

By the way, I suspect rhm doubles here because I think his heart overcall denies four spades.

[nige1]

There are mutiple ways, how to bid a hand with 9 cards in majors over a 1 of a minor opening, you can overcall, dbl or try a light michaels. So here is hand that came up, and the question is what would be you prefered action: Favorable in imps versus good opponents: RHO opens 1♦ which is 4+ and natural and you hold ♠ A Q 3 2 ♥ A 9 7 4 3 ♦ 6 ♣ J 6 5

And as a follow up question: What is our plan if LHO raises diamonds to 2 and 3 and it gets passed around to us?

I rank

1. Double = T/O. You have a 3-suiter and it seems reasonable to treat your poor ♥ suit as 4 cards.
2. 2♦ = ART. Michaels. Exaggerates your major holdings.
3. 1♥ = NAT. IMO, bidding ♥s and then doubling exaggerates the quality of the [HE[ suit and the strength of the hand.

Over 1♣ (but not 1♦), some modern partnerships agree that the cue-bid (2♣) shows 5-4 in the majors.

I'm worried that cartruck describes as "Michaels" a cue-overcall that can show 4-4, by agreement.

[Winstonm]

Equally you double and partner with KJ, KQx, xxx, xxxxx bids clubs and they cash 3 clubs and 3 diamonds when 3♥ was cold.

 

It's not an easy problem, to some extent it depends what you overcall on, for us this would be absolutely minimum for 1♥ over 1♦ which cuts nothing out, and partner responds to it like an opening bid so the spade suit doesn't get buried, but this is very much a fringe treatment.

 

I'd overcall 1♥ and x not necessarily showing extras if some number of diamonds comes back to me

 

Winning bridge to a great extent is a matter of playing for the best odds - 1H has an advantage when partner holds exactly 3 hearts. Double has the flexibility for the other hand types that partner may hold that allows us to compete. It seems to me that double offers the best odds.

[MrAce]

Winning bridge to a great extent is a matter of playing for the best odds - 1H has an advantage when partner holds exactly 3 hearts. Double has the flexibility for the other hand types that partner may hold that allows us to compete. It seems to me that double offers the best odds.

 

No, 1 ♥ has the flexibility to make another call later such as DBL. Starting DBL does not. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

[Zelandakh]

I'm worried that cartruck describes as "Michaels" a cue-overcall that can show 4-4, by agreement.

I would hope that he does not give Michaels as an explanation to opponents as that would clearly be misinformation. It would also be problematic to use the term without further commentary in forums. Calling it Michaels between him and his father is just fine.

[rhm]

Standard bidders sometimes lose a 4-4 S fit after

 

(1♦)-1♥-(P)-1N

 

because Advancer thinks/fears that a 1♠ advance would promise 5+ S; or a 5-3 H fit after

 

(1♦)-X-(P)-1N,

 

because a 2♥ rebid would not show a Flannery-type hand, but be strong.

I would not throw this sequence ((1♦)-X-(P)-1N-(P)-2♥) at partner without discussion, but I beg to differ.

Even playing standard I do not understand why so many insist bidding 2♥ here needs to be reserved for hands too strong to overcall immediately.

My guess is the reason is lazy thinking.

Playing equal level conversion anyway this is a clear flannery type sequence (could be 6♥-4♠).

What the matter is wrong with bidding 3♥ over 1N to show a powerhouse, assuming a 1N in response to a takeout dbl shows some values.

It is not like takeout doubler has any problem differentiating strong hands with a heart suit.

Are 3♥,4♥ or 2♦ followed by hearts not enough to differentiate between very strong heart hands, which occur every other leap year anyway while the flannery hand type is quite common?

 

The risk of missing a spade fit (or a club fit) by overcalling 1♥ (LHO might preempt next) is far more likely than missing a good heart fit by starting with a double.

Sometimes we will have a fit in both majors, in which case playing spades will often be preferable, due to ruffing diamonds with the "short" trump side can provide extra tricks.

When we overcall 1♥ partner will not look fro a spade fit when he has heart support, say 5♠-3♥s.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[MrAce]

I would not throw this sequence ((1♦)-X-(P)-1N-(P)-2♥) at partner without discussion, but I beg to differ.

Even playing standard I do not understand why so many insist bidding 2♥ here needs to be reserved for hands too strong to overcall immediately.

My guess is the reason is lazy thinking.

Playing equal level conversion anyway this is a clear flannery type sequence (could be 6♥-4♠).

What the matter is wrong with bidding 3♥ over 1N to show a powerhouse, assuming a 1N in response to a takeout dbl shows some values.

It is not like takeout doubler has any problem differentiating strong hands with a heart suit.

Are 3♥,4♥ or 2♦ followed by hearts not enough to differentiate between very strong heart hands, which occur every other leap year anyway while the flannery hand type is quite common?

 

The risk of missing a spade fit (or a club fit) by overcalling 1♥ (LHO might preempt next) is far more likely than missing a good heart fit by starting with a double.

Sometimes we will have a fit in both majors, in which case playing spades will often be preferable, due to ruffing diamonds with the "short" trump side can provide extra tricks.

When we overcall 1♥ partner will not look fro a spade fit when he has heart support, say 5♠-3♥s.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

You are conveniently skipping the most important point which is the fact that you have no clue whatsoever how the auction will proceed.

Say you have 6-4 or any minimum Flannery hand that you decided to start DBL but the auction goes a little different than your example, such as

 

(1♦) - X- (2♦) -3♣

 

Now you are stunned. You can try pass and play ypur club fit when 6-2 or even 6-3 major fit was available at MP.

At imps it's another issue because had you known there is a fit in major you could have a shot at game. If you decide to act over 3♣ that opens a whole new cans of worms, which may work occasionally and does not work well in other hands.

So yes, if you had a talent to know how the auction will proceed, then starting dbl with Flannery hands including 6-4 majors makes more sense. Otherwise I am failing to see the need for starting dbl.

 

I am not even mentioning the fact that allowing pd know your main suit before you dbl also allows him to make smarter evaluation of his hand when you find a fit in another suit.

I admit not starting dbl has its own drawbacks. Basically none of these 2 styles are cost free as some people try to show them.

[MrAce]

I rank

1. 1♥ = NAT. IMO, bidding ♥s and then doubling exaggerates the quality of the [HE[ suit and the strength of the hand.

 

Correct your knowledge about starting with a simple overcall followed by DBL.

It never promises or tells anything about the overcall suit quality. It is all about other places to play and willing to compete. Nothing less nothing more at the point double is made.

Overcall followed by double followed by rebidding your overcall suit is another story.

 

For example you overcall1 ♠ with

 

JTxxxx AKx x AQJ

 

and the auction goes

 

(1♦) - 1♠ - (2♦)- pass

pass -

 

You have to double and that has nothing to do with spade quality.

[rhm]

You are conveniently skipping the most important point which is the fact that you have no clue whatsoever how the auction will proceed.

Say you have 6-4 or any minimum Flannery hand that you decided to start DBL but the auction goes a little different than your example, such as

 

(1♦) - X- (2♦) -3♣

 

Now you are stunned. You can try pass and play ypur club fit when 6-2 or even 6-3 major fit was available at MP.

At imps it's another issue because had you known there is a fit in major you could have a shot at game. If you decide to act over 3♣ that opens a whole new cans of worms, which may work occasionally and does not work well in other hands.

So yes, if you had a talent to know how the auction will proceed, then starting dbl with Flannery hands including 6-4 majors makes more sense. Otherwise I am failing to see the need for starting dbl.

 

I am not even mentioning the fact that allowing pd know your main suit before you dbl also allows him to make smarter evaluation of his hand when you find a fit in another suit.

I mentioned I like equal level conversion only as a side remark, believing its advantages outweigh its disadvantages.

But I readily admit there are scenarios, which could be problematic. Responder has to be careful when responding in the lowest unbid suit (a minor) at a high level, since takeout doubler does not necessarily guarantee support.

But the current 4♠-5♥-1♦-3♣ hand has little to do with equal level conversion since we do have club support.

 

Nobody can predict how an auction will develop.

However, I sincerely are convinced that starting with a double in this case is more likely to give us far less headaches than starting with a 1♥ overcall.

If you would ask what to do with this hand over a 3♦ preempt you would find very few experts preferring 3♥ to a takeout double. (If you pass with the actual hand over 3♦ (fair enough) make it a little stronger).

So it sounds to me strange claiming that a 1♥ overcall would leave you overall better placed to manage the subsequent auction when LHO might just about raise diamonds to any level.

Overcalling 1♥ puts all your eggs in one basket. Fine if your fit is in hearts.

Of course double could let us miss a 5-3 fit in hearts. Otherwise this would not be contentious at all, but I see no good reason why a takeout double followed by a 2♥ bid over a 1NT response has to be played as super-strong.

 

Reverse the major suit lengths (5♠-4♥) and I am with the overcallers, but this is of course very different.

When I overcall in hearts and subsequently double a dimaond raise I am unlikely to hold 4 cards in spades and partner should take this into account. .

M typical distribution would be more likely 3♠-6♥-1♦-3♣

 

Rainer Herrmann

[MrAce]

So it sounds to me strange claiming that a 1♥ overcall would leave you overall better placed to manage the subsequent auction.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

Yes I believe strongly that starting overcall especially with 6-4 M hands is the winner. I would not bet my money on the hand in OP dbl vs overcall as I would with 6-4 hands though.

When it is not our pd but LHO who bids, and he acts before our pd, my all 5-3 ♥ fit are gone bye bye if I start dbl. To my experience it is much more frequent to lose those fits compared to my options later and failing to miss other fits.

 

OTOH, if we end up defending, especially a NT contract, starting dbl will allow my pd to make smarter leads, I am aware of this. But starting dbl will also reveal your shape more than needed for declarer in some other hands.

[Winstonm]

No, 1 ♥ has the flexibility to make another call later such as DBL. Starting DBL does not. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

 

How does your partner know if you are balancing with an 11-count or actually have additional values? I am not being critical but am curious how you think a partner with a hand such as KJxxxx, Kx, xx, xxx should bid in an auction that starts: 1D-1H-3D*-?

 

For me, it is a pass, but when partner reopens with a double I can confidently bid 4S. This is a losing style when both sides can make a partscore, I realize. So I was only wondering how this problem is being dealt with these days or if it is even considered a problem.