IMPs: 72-AJ87-95-AQ972

[diana_eva]

IMPs, all vul:

 

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?s=S72HAJ87D95CAQ972&d=w&v=b&a=PP1DP1SP2D?]200|300[/hv]

 

Do something now? Would you have bid earlier? If so, what?

[MrAce]

IMPs, all vul:

 

Do something now? Would you have bid earlier? If so, what?

 

1-Yes, DBL

2- Yes, 2♣. This is the overcall you should consider a lot over 1♦ opening because it screws up their auction a lot.

[broze]

Double now.

 

Imo bidding initially is insane. Agree with Timo that you should strive to overcall 2C over 1D where possible but doing it with a flat hand and a bad 5 card suit is asking for -1100

[The_Badger]

Agree with both MrAce and broze. If ever there is an opening auction where poker-style like bidding comes into play this is it. An initial overcall of 2♣ may occasionally go down heavily, but it sticks a firm spanner in the opponents' bidding. Personally prefer to be 5-4-3-1 than 5-4-2-2 though.

 

With a passed partner this 2♣ bid is usually lead directional at best, but there's a simple rule to follow here too.

 

A passed partner bids up to the appropriate limit of LOTT taking vulnerability into consideration: any further action is at the discretion of the overcaller always.

[nige1]

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?s=S72HAJ87D95CAQ972&d=w&v=b&a=PP1DP1SP2D?]200|300|

IMPs, all vul:

Do something now? Would you have bid earlier? If so, what?[/hv]

Over 1♦, I rank

1. 1N = ART. Raptor by agreement. Over 1m that can be 3 cards or less, this can show either m + either M. Might be unsound but still fun.
2. Pass = NAT. Safe
3. 2♣ = NAT. Disruptive but too courageous for many, with a poor 5 card suit, vul, at imps.
4. 1♥ = NAT. Prefer a better suit, even if your style is to overcall 4 card suits.
5. 2N = ART. UNT. Misdescrptive and foolhardy

Over 2♦, I rank

1. Double = T/O. by agreement (Without agreement, the danger is that partner might treat it as penalty)
2. 2♥ = NAT. If you overcall freely, at the 1-level, on 5 card suits, partner might be able to read this.
3. Pass = NAT

[MrAce]

 

1. 2♣ = NAT. Disruptive but too courageous for many, with a poor 5 card suit, vul, at imps.

 

Double now.

 

.....and a bad 5 card suit is asking for -1100

 

 

AQ972 is neither a poor nor a bad 5 card suit. It is not a good suit for sure, but imo "poor" "bad" are overstatements. It is a normal suit with 2 top honors and not disappointing spot cards.

When you guys use both "5 card" and "poor/bad" in same sentence, you are overstating your point imo because you already mentioned that it is a 5 card suit.

[gszes]

X marks the spot

 

There is a VERY strong chance the auction is about to die out and partner may have a flawed hand to back in (think 4 hearts and xx in clubs as an example). The fact that lho is a passed hand increases the chance p has a reasonable holding. 2H is off mark and should be saved for hands that were unable to take action the first time around (K432 876432 Q Kx). Having 2 possible places to play greatly reduces the risk factor.

[rmnka447]

Sorry, but I'm bidding a "disruptive" 2 ♣ over 1 ♦ initially. It makes it more difficult for the opponents to sort out any major fits, they may have. With LHO being a passed hand, there's less danger of a phone number penalty double of 2 ♣ and a pretty good likelihood it will be a part score hand.

 

If partner finds a raise to 3 ♣ over LHO opponent's negative double, the opponents will have to sort it out at the three level.

[neilkaz]

Sorry, but I'm bidding a "disruptive" 2 ♣ over 1 ♦ initially. It makes it more difficult for the opponents to sort out any major fits, they may have. With LHO being a passed hand, there's less danger of a phone number penalty double of 2 ♣ and a pretty good likelihood it will be a part score hand.

 

If partner finds a raise to 3 ♣ over LHO opponent's negative double, the opponents will have to sort it out at the three level.

Same for me!

[WellSpyder]

 

Over 2♦, I rank

1. Double = T/O. by agreement (Without agreement, the danger is that partner might treat it as penalty)
   

I'm glad someone mentions that possibility. I would go further and say I would expect it to be for penalty unless you have agreed it is for T/O (since you have already had an opportunity to make a T/O double of ♦ and you are not in the protective seat).