Is this worth an overcall?

[AL78]

♠AQ85

♥J9873

♦-

♣KQT5

 

RHO opens 1NT 12-14, you are red against green. Assuming you are not playing any two suited overcall structure, is this worth a 2♥ overcall at MPs?

[bluenikki]

♠AQ85

♥J9873

♦-

♣KQT5

 

RHO opens 1NT 12-14, you are red against green. Assuming you are not playing any two suited overcall structure, is this worth a 2♥ overcall at MPs?

With a singleton or void, you should strain to intervene over a weak notrump. (Lacking shortness, you should strain _not_ to.)

 

Provided my partnership agrees with that philosophy, I'd overcall two _clubs_ in absence of a convention..

 

Of course, I'd prefer to be playing "Kelsey," where 2♣ shows red shortness, with 3+ in every suit but the short one.

[LBengtsson]

♠AQ85

♥J9873

♦-

♣KQT5

 

RHO opens 1NT 12-14, you are red against green. Assuming you are not playing any two suited overcall structure, is this worth a 2♥ overcall at MPs?

 

Nice hand, poor suit, I would not even make a direct overcall at white/white, let alone red/white. If you had a conventional bid available showing two/(three) suits in one bid then I would be using it, but with caution. The dreaded -200/-500 at MPs comes to mind. So as it stands with no conventional bid available, I would pass here.

[TMorris]

Overcalling 2 ♥ showing a single suited hand is not something I would do.

 

I know no-one who doesn't play something to show two suiters in this situation. If you played something I would use if for sure and consider it automatic.

[mycroft]

I know people who suggest Landy over a weak NT, because "partner I have both majors" is almost more important to be able to say than "partner I have hearts". The problem is that they forget, because it's such a "simple, just natural" system. But still.

 

What do I do if I have to play Natural? Probably overcall. It's a minimum, and the suit is bad, and we probably belong in spades. But if partner has the balance, that'll probably include some decent hearts, and the cards will all be right. And the problem is that if it's wrong, sure, it's worse than letting them play 1NT. But if it's right - even if it's not game right - 110 beats 1NT-2.

 

At IMPs, it's a more interesting question...

[Tramticket]

Given the methods, you have to pass - particularly at this vulnerability.

 

There is a lot to be said for playing 2D/2H/2S as natural, but even if we are playing these as natural, I would want to have 2C as Landy.

[AL78]

This wasn't a hand from any of my games, it was a hand within a set with commentry linked from the site of a nearby bridge club I used to play at:

 

Dorking Bridge Club hand commentaries

 

The hand I posted is the third one down on that link. Note:

 

"After 1NT by E a contract that normally scores very well when Non Vulnerable. As can be seen one East was allowed to play in 1N making 5 tricks which resulted in a top. Many will bid a natural 2♥ by South with opening points and a (weak) 5 card suit. This is likely to be passed out."

 

I've bolded the bit that stood out to me. I was thinking I am out of touch with modern bidding style because I would not overcall 2♥ on that hand if I was only playing natural overcalls. If playing Landy a 2♣ bid is automatic. Many would overcall 2♥? Does suit quality not mean anything anymore?

[Cyberyeti]

This wasn't a hand from any of my games, it was a hand within a set with commentry linked from the site of a nearby bridge club I used to play at:

 

Dorking Bridge Club hand commentaries

 

The hand I posted is the third one down on that link. Note:

 

"After 1NT by E a contract that normally scores very well when Non Vulnerable. As can be seen one East was allowed to play in 1N making 5 tricks which resulted in a top. Many will bid a natural 2♥ by South with opening points and a (weak) 5 card suit. This is likely to be passed out."

 

I've bolded the bit that stood out to me. I was thinking I am out of touch with modern bidding style because I would not overcall 2♥ on that hand if I was only playing natural overcalls. If playing Landy a 2♣ bid is automatic. Many would overcall 2♥? Does suit quality not mean anything anymore?

 

Amusingly, we never get to show hearts on this hand, we play asptro so show a 2 suiter with spades, if the other suit is hearts they'll be longer/better so our auction is (1N)-2♦-3♠-4♠

[LBengtsson]

This wasn't a hand from any of my games, it was a hand within a set with commentry linked from the site of a nearby bridge club I used to play at:

 

Dorking Bridge Club hand commentaries

 

The hand I posted is the third one down on that link. Note:

 

"After 1NT by E a contract that normally scores very well when Non Vulnerable. As can be seen one East was allowed to play in 1N making 5 tricks which resulted in a top. Many will bid a natural 2♥ by South with opening points and a (weak) 5 card suit. This is likely to be passed out."

 

I've bolded the bit that stood out to me. I was thinking I am out of touch with modern bidding style because I would not overcall 2♥ on that hand if I was only playing natural overcalls. If playing Landy a 2♣ bid is automatic. Many would overcall 2♥? Does suit quality not mean anything anymore?

 

ROFL :) So North turns up with a 11 count and two useful ♥s :that happens every day of the week - not! I know, I know, East/West are unlikely to end up in a major suit contract, and 1NT-2 might give them a top, but bidding off the cuff like this is dangerous. There's a case for North raising vulnerable, or suggesting game surely? Oh, the commentator did not suggest that. Bidding 2♥ might be right sometimes, but it is not the percentage call. I am with you, AL78: suit quality matters.

[pescetom]

I don't have experience of playing against weak NT. Against strong NT suit quality certainly matters, but awareness of partner's stance about suit quality matters even more.

[Gilithin]

Amusingly, we never get to show hearts on this hand, we play asptro so show a 2 suiter with spades, if the other suit is hearts they'll be longer/better so our auction is (1N)-2♦-3♠-4♠

A 3♠ advance looks unusual. I suspect in a book this would be an example of the 2NT forcing relay.

[Cyberyeti]

A 3♠ advance looks unusual. I suspect in a book this would be an example of the 2NT forcing relay.

 

We tend not to do that with a spade fit and an invitational hand as partner shapes out and we get no idea of range

[Gilithin]

We tend not to do that with a spade fit and an invitational hand as partner shapes out and we get no idea of range

In the classic structure, (1NT) - 2♦ - 2NT -- 3m - 3♠ is invitational while (1NT) - 2♦ - 2NT -- 3♥ and (1NT) - 2♦ - 2NT -- 3♠ are min/max with both majors, so range is not an issue and you just get to invite with more information exchanged. But I know some play 2NT as a GF relay too, so if you do that things get a little more difficult on invitational hands.