2[clubs] / 2[diamonds] interference over a 1[hearts] response

[Guest AlphaKappa]

Among the ‘little secrets’ of competitive bidding there is one that I appreciate most because it continues, time after time, delivering good results. I don’t resist the temptation to share it, with hopes however that you’ll never use it against me.

 

The auction goes LHO : 1-of-a-Minor, RHO : 1♥ and now you come in with 2-of-the-other-Minor.

 

It is curious to see how difficult it is now for the opponents to explore a Spades fit (at least without incurring the risk of going overboard).

 

The following example (played on BBO yesterday) illustrates :

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sk84h64daq432cq64&w=saj32hj3dt7cakjt2&n=sq6hk8752dj965c73&e=st975haqt9dk8c985]399|300[/hv]

 

West opens 1♣, East responds 1♥. I (south) interfere with 2♦. West doubles and East bids 2♥ (taking the double for a support double). All pass.

 

Result 2♥-1. I would have been down 1 in 2♦. North - South can make 10 tricks with Spades as trumps.

 

You can blame it on the support double. But even if you decide to forgo such a valuable device doubling for Spades with a minimal opening is dangerous : if you find partner without 4 Spades you may be forcing him into making a bid that exceeds your safety level.

 

Basically, the 2♦ interference makes it very hard for the opponents to find a Spades fit unless :

- opener has reverse values (he bids 2♠) ; or

- responder has at least 11+ HCP 4♥4♠ (he doubles, accepting 2NT) or 12+H and 5♥4♠ (he reverses)

 

In other words, a 2♠ or 3♠ partial based on points divided, f.i., 13 - 9 (far more frequent than either partner having reverse values) is going to be really hard to get to.

 

And all that because of a tiny little 2♦ interference …

 

Remember : you promised not to use it against me.

 

(I first read this ‘secret’ many many years ago as an incidental remark about a deal in Mike Lawrence’s book “How to Play Card Combinations”. In the course of my readings I saw other authors mention it, do not know who was first to draw attention to it. I also do not know if the secret ever made it into some issue of the BOLS Tips series but, if not, it should have.)

[Tramticket]

If you play Support Doubles, west should pass and east re-open with a double (take-out). We play a weak NT and choose to use a double to primarily show a strong NT type hand without a stop rather than as a Support Double. But we still pass and partner re-open with a double. In either case we the spade fit is found at a reasonable level.

[Cyberyeti]

We play X showing 4 cards in the unbid suit (and not necessarily any extra values), bidding it showing 5. This shows most value when the auction goes something like 1♦-(P)-1♥-(1♠) and now X shows 4 clubs, 2♣ shows 5 and you avoid nasty false preference situations, but we tend to keep our agreements pretty much blanket so it applies here too.

[DozyDom]

I'm not really convinced. About any of this. You say that on this hand the opps' bidding mixup didn't matter - are you sure? If they had met each other before - as I take it they hadn't - then they would have an agreement as to what the double means. If it's takeout, as W believes, they'll find their spade fit. Your overcall will have no lead-directing value because you'll be on lead - all it'll have done is given the opps a better idea of the distribution, and possibly persuade your partner to compete to 4D in the hope of a 10-card fit, which will either push them into a 4S they might otherwise not have reached, or let them get the 500 penalty.

 

If it's support, as E believes, the double won't happen. Then your partner will raise you to 3D unless he's asleep. Then you get the auction pass-pass-X, unless you think W is passing this out green on green. Then his partner bids probably 3S - 4 seems doubtful. Aand they've reached the normal spot on the hand, well done. Again, your interference has slowed them down in getting to a perfectly normal contract, but has no lead-directing advantage.

 

But this is a fairly perfect layout. If they actually have a heart fit, you've done nothing at all. If you don't find partner with juicy 4-card support, they might penalise you when you come in in the sandwich position. In the end, your hand is terrible as an overcall - a balanced hand with a textureless 5-card suit. Sit back and defend. Mike Lawrence is I'm sure a fan of overcalling in this position; I am too. But only when I have an overcall, and you don't.

[ggwhiz]

Any regular partnership of a decent skill level gets to 2♠ very easily and when your partner owns a raise to 3♦ (as they do here) they will punish it more often the better they are, especially if you do this when red.

 

If your mission is to club the baby seals, so be it but you won't be graduating to tougher fields this way.

[P_Marlowe]

Interventions hurts, makes it harder to exchange information.

Sabine Auken is known for saying "I love bidding 2C over 1D".

Sometimes there are tools, that allow you to recover some of the

lost ground, sometimes not.

[maartenxq]

Playing winning bridge against opponents who cannot bid or are confused about agreements is hardly remarkable. In this deal responder has a clear reopening dbl if they play support dbls. If not opener would already have dbld. Agressive pairs may reach 4 ♠but any competent pair will reach a spade contract. On a bad day the dbl of responder stands and you will suffer. Enjoy your sucess meanwhile.

 

Maarten Baltussen

[miamijd]

2D isn't much of an overcall; it is fraught with danger (if the cards were different, the auction could easily go pass-pass, X by East, float). NV at MPs, however, it has merit, both for a lead and for interference purposes. That's the only time I would even think of making it. Vul it's awful, and at IMPs it's god-awful.

 

Here, assuming your playing against good opponents and not idiots, West has to pass, and your partner should raise to 3D. Now the opponents are probably stuck, and you buy it there. If you are NV, your -100 is probably going to be a very good score. If you are V, however, you will be -200, which I think will be quite poor, as I doubt too many E-W pairs are going to reach this very thin game at MPs.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[TylerE]

Don't really think it's "sage advice" to say you get a good result when opponents make a systemic misbid.