what to bid

[maris oren]

https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|maris%20oren,Karert,~~M20169,~~M20168|md|3SKT8HQ97D876CKQJ3,S6432H8653DJ32CT5,SQ75HAKJ2D5CA9874,SAJ9HT4DAKQT94C62|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%201|mb|1C|mb|1D|mb|3C|mb|P|mb|P|mb|3D|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|CK|pc|C5|pc|C9|pc|C2|pc|CQ|pc|CT|pc|C7|pc|C6|pc|HQ|pc|H3|pc|H2|pc|H4|pc|H9|pc|H5|pc|HK|pc|HT|pc|HA|pc|D9|pc|H7|pc|H8|pc|DT|pc|D6|pc|D2|pc|D5|pc|D4|pc|D7|pc|DJ|pc|C8|pc|S4|pc|S7|pc|SJ|pc|SK|pc|ST|pc|S2|pc|S5|pc|SA|pc|DA|pc|D8|pc|D3|pc|C4|pc|DK|pc|C3|pc|S6|pc|HJ|pc|DQ|pc|CJ|pc|S3|pc|CA|pc|S9|pc|S8|pc|H6|pc|SQ|

 

After partners 1 ♣opening bid and opponents 1overcall what should I bid-2 over 1

[shyams]

The best action, in my view, is to respond 2♦ over the 1♦ overcall. It shows values + ♣ support for partner and keeps it flexible for partner to describe their hand.

 

It is possible for partner to hold a diamond stopper which enables our side to play in 3NT. In the given example, partner can make a forward move and you could hope to land in 5♣.

[nige1]

[hv=lin=st||pn|maris%20oren,Karert,~~M20169,~~M20168|md|3SKT8HQ97D876CKQJ3,S6432H8653DJ32CT5,SQ75HAKJ2D5CA9874,SAJ9HT4DAKQT94C62|sv|o|rh||ah|Board%201|mb|1C|mb|1D|mb|3C|mb|P|mb|P|mb|3D|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|CK|pc|C5|pc|C9|pc|C2|pc|CQ|pc|CT|pc|C7|pc|C6|pc|HQ|pc|H3|pc|H2|pc|H4|pc|H9|pc|H5|pc|HK|pc|HT|pc|HA|pc|D9|pc|H7|pc|H8|pc|DT|pc|D6|pc|D2|pc|D5|pc|D4|pc|D7|pc|DJ|pc|C8|pc|S4|pc|S7|pc|SJ|pc|SK|pc|ST|pc|S2|pc|S5|pc|SA|pc|DA|pc|D8|pc|D3|pc|C4|pc|DK|pc|C3|pc|S6|pc|HJ|pc|DQ|pc|CJ|pc|S3|pc|CA|pc|S9|pc|S8|pc|H6|pc|SQ|]300|300| Maris Oren "After partners 1♣ opening bid and opponents 1♦ overcall, what should I bid -- 2 over 1?"

++++++++++++++++++++

Difficult choice. I rank ...

1. 2♦ = UCB. Usually 4+ ♣s. Slight overbid. Agree with Shyams. Should reach 5♣.

2. Double = NEG. OK unless it promises majors. 4♥ seems playable.

3. 3♣ = NAT. Reluctant to bid this with a pudding.

4. Pass = NAT. Partner is likely to protect but just postpones the problem.

5. 2♣ = NAT. Underbid.[/hv]

[DavidKok]

When you say 2♦ is a slight overbid, what range do you normally expect? I would think this is "10 points and up", and I'm not (that) worried about the shape as 3NT is one of our most likely final contracts. Or is this GF in your system?

[Cyberyeti]

Unusually we play (non GF) inverted minors on over an overcall so would bid 2♣, playing more standard methods, 2♦ also not GF.

[akwoo]

I think 3♣ shows a hand like

 

♠ Kxx

♥ xxx

♦ x

♣ Qxxxxx

[dsLawsd]

I like 2♦limit raise with at least 4 pieces.

Some in the Western US used 3♣ = weak 4 or 5 clubs with little defense against diamonds/ 2NT = constructive limit raise with defensive values (not usually diamonds). A few players might use

3♦ = "Bluhmer" with NO wastage in diamonds looking for game. Not the shape for a negative double. Obviously good club spots.

It is very necessary to have a good partnership understanding as to which style preferred.

 

4 Diamonds = void mild slam try.

[Huibertus]

You need to show your club support and invitational values with 2 ♦. This keeps options open, like playing a ♣ part score, a ♣ game, potentially 3NT, 6 ♣ if Partner has a better hand, or even 4♥/♠ if patner has a good major, short diamonds and shorter ♣. Double will work some times, but will also lead to bad 4 major contracts and a pass by partner in some cases where that will be the worst outcome.

[themarc]

Playing with an intelligent partner and not a robot, my regular partnership response playing negative free bids would be a double showing one of three types of hand: normal neg dbl, or 10+ pt limit raise or 10+ with a good suit. Over his heart response, 2C would show this hand, and he can bid game, or invite in Clubs or NT which I would accept. And if he then bids Spades showing 4-4-2-3, I would bid 3 or 4 hearts, depending on if I feel lucky.

[miamijd]

What you all play with your normal partners or think is best is irrelevant to this question. The OP was playing OP was playing with a Robot, so he needs to play the Robot system.

 

In Robot Standard, if a one-level opening is followed by a non-jump overcall, then the cheapest (non-jump) cue bid shows support for opener's suit with limit raise or better strength. That's exactly what South has here, so 2D is the right bid. 2C is a serious underbid.

 

For those who don't think this is a good way to play this bid, it also happens to be "Standard Expert" here in the USA, so it's not exactly like it's from left field.

 

Cheers,

mike

[mikeh]

Pretending for a moment that we are playing bridge, and therefore no robots are involved, I think the best call is to pass.

 

Now, if 1C promised 4+ clubs, I’d opt for the cuebid to show a limit or better raise, but in NA, and for many elsewhere, 1 C is frequently 3. In my partnerships, it’s 2+ (I play 2/1 with 14-16 1N and would open almost all 11 counts, but I’m writing in the context of a more mainstream approach, where 1C is 3+ and 1N would be 15-17)

 

Why pass?

 

We have a soft 11 count...in fact a horrible 11 count with the worst possible shape and diamond holding. 2D forces to at least 3C (unless opener rebids 2N,which has its own problems).

 

We do NOT want to be declaring if partnervis something like 3=3=3=4 12 count: certainly not at the 3-level.

 

Meanwhile, if we pass and LHO passes, opener will strain to reopen with short diamonds, and we will cuebid 2D if possible. That shows a good hand, and since we did not bid a major over 1D, we deny a 4 card major. We can’t have5+ clubs, since we would have raised clubs. Since we didn’t bid notrump over 1D, we deny a stopper. So, if we get to do this, we have described our hand about as well as it is possible to describe.

 

If partner passes 1D, it will be because he has 3+ diamonds, and almost certainly fewer than 15 hcp ( no 1N opening and neither opp bid a major), and this is exactly when we’re wanting to defend 1D for a small minus or small a plus, rather than declare 3C.

 

Now, if LHO bids, and partner passes, we may need to do something like bid 3C next time, but say Lho raises diamaonds: we can double since partner will be able to work out that we can’t have a pure penalty double (most of the time, anyway) and a trump lead will be obvious.

 

One can’t do this with robots, of course, because their bidding algorithms are crude and inflexible.

 

Most of us have been conditioned into taking action with strength, but I am confident that pass rates to be the best action on hands like this. Note that the pass then cuebid requires a lot of specific ‘things’: no stopper, inadequate length in opener’s suit, no biddable suit of our own, and at least 3 losing cards in overcaller’s suit.

[nullve]

We do NOT want to be declaring if partnervis something like 3=3=3=4 12 count: certainly not at the 3-level.

I'd much rather declare 1N than defend 1♦ opposite a 3334 12 count.

[mikeh]

I'd much rather declare 1N than defend 1♦ opposite a 3334 12 count.

Not sure how you get there after bidding 2D, lol. And 1N with no semblance of a stopper and more hcp than partner will play you for will often lead to far worse results than passing at this point,

[nullve]

We have a soft 11 count...in fact a horrible 11 count

Agree.

 

more hcp than partner will play you for

Do I have a partner who thinks a horrible 11 count is still better than an average 10 count? Or does 1N deny as much as 10 points?

 

Not sure how you get there after bidding 2D, lol.

I would bid 1N (yes, without a stopper), not 2♦.

 

1N with no semblance of a stopper and more hcp than partner will play you for will often lead to far worse results than passing at this point,

You didn't say

 

1N with no semblance of a stopper and more hcp than partner will play you for will often lead to far worse results than passing at this point,

which I believe, but sadly cannot prove, is false. So what can I say?

 

There are still players (including me in previous life but presumably also many top Italian players) that would never open 1N with a 5c major because of the perceived strength of arguments like "If I open 1N with 5 spades, then we could easily miss an 8 or 9c spade fit". What convinced me (and no doubt lots of others) that opening 1N with a 5c major is a good idea was actually opening 1N with a 5c major and getting a feel for the results.

 

I guess bidding 1N without a stopper is similar.

[mikeh]

Oh, I don’t have a huge issue with bidding 1N without a stopper. There are many sequences/hands where it’s the best of flawed actions. If I knew that my call was going to end the auction, and that partner had a balanced minimum, I’d choose 1N in a heartbeat even if it shows about 8-10 with a stopper. But partner is still there. He will sit for it when we belong in clubs. He will raise us when he has a big hand, where (as an example) he might have reopened with 1N. Picture AQxx AJx Kx Axxx. Try explaining going down in 3N.

 

I do think 1N is better than any other bid. I just think it’s probably not the best call.....not as good as pass. Indeed, I suspect that your aversion to pass is because you’ve not tried it in similar situations. Sort of how you imply that I haven’t bid stopperless 1N before😀

 

I only just now looked at the actual layout. Partner has a good, but not exceptional, 3415 with Axxxx in clubs and 14 hcp. Why on earth would he pull to 2C? Can’t you hold KJ9x in diamonds? Or some such? Meanwhile they run 6 diamonds and the spade Ace while you’re cold for 5C. Where you will likely get after you pass 1D and cuebid over either a pass or, more likely, 2D by overcaller. Even if you miss game, a club partial gives you a plus score. Losing the first 7 tricks in 1N doesn’t.

[nullve]

I suspect that your aversion to pass is because you’ve not tried it in similar situations.

I have tried it. After all, it's the book action on many similar hands.

 

I only just now looked at the actual layout. Partner has a good, but not exceptional, 3415 with Axxxx in clubs and 14 hcp. Why on earth would he pull to 2C? Can’t you hold KJ9x in diamonds? Or some such? Meanwhile they run 6 diamonds and the spade Ace while you’re cold for 5C.

This is why one should NEVER open 1N with a small doubleton! (Only kidding, but this is actually how people used to argue against it.)

 

But yes, I would almost certainly look stupid on this deal. :(