[Elyk25]

Hello,


In the below hand the other day, I opened and then North make a weak jump bid of 3♣! (with 109xxxx). Even though vulnerability was favorable, I just find this bid absolutely ridiculous. What are the standard norms for weak jump overcalls? Are they normally done with 6 card suits this weak? How are these norms generally affected by vulnerability? Thank you!

---

[TylerE]

I would hardly consider that ridiculous or very weak. Hell, the AVERAGE hand I make a WJO with is probably worse than that. Obv it would be a little better to have a chunkier suit but esp. at favorable I really don't care that much. T9xxxx is much better than xxxxxx.

[wank]

Yes it's ridiculous. The hand has far too much defence relative to offence.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the main problem with widerange WJOs is, that partner has to guess in certain situations.
The guesses may include
- bidding 3NT based on tricks, if Txxxxx is ok, than Hxx will not be enough to expect 5-6
tricks from the suit
- bidding on over their major suit game
- the bid is obviously not a lead director, if they bid 3NT, and sometimes the bid may
be based on a good suit

The advantages is obviously, that you increase the frequence, and you may get the opponents
thinking, that AQ is well positioned.

Take your pick and dont complain, if you have to pay of due to your choice.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: For what it is worth, I would also not overcall with this suit.

[Cyberyeti]

wank, on 2016-May-08, 22:07, said:

Yes it's ridiculous. The hand has far too much defence relative to offence.

Exactly, the weakness is not the issue, 109xxxx and out is an easy WJO if you play that style, but WJOing this hand will encourage partner to take a phantom way too often

[fromageGB]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-May-09, 03:37, said:

Exactly, the weakness is not the issue, 109xxxx and out is an easy WJO if you play that style, but WJOing this hand will encourage partner to take a phantom way too often

I don't think so. I would not WJO with this, but if you did play this style, you do it because it is disruptive in itself and it is not an invitation to preempt further. You interfere with their normal bidding and that alone is the objective.

As to being ridiculous, again no. If the style is understood by the partnership, it works. You have a low ODR, but opponents are not going to let you play there. You will be doubled occasionally, sure, but more times that not you remove some of their descriptive ability. You may cause them or tempt them to bid a non-making game while others play part score, or it may deter them from NT. Anything can go wrong. Your belief is that the declaring side will go wrong more than you will.

They do it to me, too.

[fromageGB]

Elyk25, on 2016-May-08, 20:19, said:

What are the standard norms for weak jump overcalls? Are they normally done with 6 card suits this weak? How are these norms generally affected by vulnerability?

I think there is no norm. Traditionally the bid was a long suit headed by some top honour(s) with few outside defensive tricks. A hand where you will get a good number of tricks playing in your suit, but maybe none in theirs. A hand where if partner is on lead, you would be happy for him to lead that suit and underlead a K or Q. A hand where partner can consider a sacrifice, as you have described your hand to be suitable for one.

Vulnerability affects it in that the effectiveness of a sacrifice depends on the relative scores, so NV may be weaker.

However, there seems to be an increasing use of very variable WJOs, and this is an example. They are more risky, but they have the advantage that the variability works both ways. The opening side cannot assume what sort of hand you have. Hence you can make a WJO on a 5 card suit with considerable outside strength, maybe an opening hand if partner has passed, or it could be a traditional type. Opponents are in the dark as much as your partner.

If you want to try this way, first agree with partner that for the purposes of an opening lead he completely ignores your bid, and that he does not raise unless he genuinely thinks his bid will make.

[helene_t]

I wouldn't call it ridicolous but it wouldn't be my choice. The playing strength is ok but as Wank and Cyberyeti say, the hand has too much defence. You could have the agreement that it can be extremely undisciplined and partner is therefore not invited to raise, and it that case it is ok. But that is not the agreement I would assume undiscussed.

[Tramticket]

I wouldn't do it. But if partner were a passed hand, all bets are off. I have lots of licence then.

(Actually 3C would be Ghestem for me - so no I wouldn't do it!)

[notproven]

Back in the old days, when frequent psyches were standard, players often pre-empted their singleton or void (intending to run to their real suit if doubled). That's a big reason why frequent psyches were outlawed. Now, (last I looked) ACBL rules require that pre-empts be within two cards of expected length and within an announced point range. Obviously, the tendency has been for pre-empts to drift more and more into the destructive category, because they're effective and only very practiced partnerships have developed tools to deal with them. (Meckwell, for instance, both uses frequent, light pre-empts, and has tools to fight opponents' pre-empts).

The point is that pre-empts tend to be devastating against weak players or casual partnerships, so stretching the lower limits pays off. It's also a good idea to have a "slow down" mechanism in your system if your partner pre-empts (like pre-emptor re-bidding his suit means, "I have nothing"), because bidding a weak 2 or 3 in first or second seat may catch your partner with a huge hand.

As for pre-empting when playing with an unfamiliar partner: I always stick to the rules. A new partner will never figure out what you're doing, and you end up causing trouble for yourself when partner takes you seriously.

[Vampyr]

I am wondering about disclosure if overcalling with a hand like the OP hand is your style.

BTW, I don't think the OP was referring to the hand itself as "weak"; obviously it is quite good in HCP for a WJO.

[notproven]

To Vampyr (assuming that you meant me):

I psyche about twice a decade, and never a pre-empt. It is my understanding that pre-empting into a very short suit is banned as "purely destructive".

As for "very aggressive" pre-empts; if well discussed and agreed upon, we will open a four card suit at the 2 level (in 3rd seat), or a five card suit at the 3 level. We mark our convention card (3/4 level pre-empts) as "very light", and in the box for 2 level bids we note "may be as short as 4" in red ink. No alert or pre-alert has ever been required since we tend to pre-empt "normally" in first or second seat, and third seat pre-empts are expected to be wide ranging.

Jump overcalls are different. We mark our cards, "very aggressive" in red in the appropriate box and always alert.

[kenberg]

It would never cross my mind to bid 3C with that hand. That doesn't mean I regard it as a psych or alertable or anything on that order. I regard it as a very bad bid, or very much not my style if that is a better way of putting it, but that's all I would say about it.

[Vampyr]

notproven, on 2016-May-09, 16:20, said:

To Vampyr (assuming that you meant me):

I psyche about twice a decade, and never a pre-empt. It is my understanding that pre-empting into a very short suit is banned as "purely destructive".

I referred to the OP in my post, but didn't make it clear that my comment on "style" referred to the hand in the OP. Will change that.

I would be surprised if you are not permitted to psyche a pre-empt. But the ACBL is the only or one of a very few NBOs that ban certain types of psyches, so check your regulations first if you feel inclined to do it.

[johnu]

notproven, on 2016-May-09, 16:20, said:

As for "very aggressive" pre-empts; if well discussed and agreed upon, we will open a four card suit at the 2 level (in 3rd seat), or a five card suit at the 3 level. We mark our convention card (3/4 level pre-empts) as "very light", and in the box for 2 level bids we note "may be as short as 4" in red ink. No alert or pre-alert has ever been required since we tend to pre-empt "normally" in first or second seat, and third seat pre-empts are expected to be wide ranging.

Opening 4 card or shorter weak 2's in the ACBL is a disallowed convention. I thought this was clear from reading the definitions of 2 and 3 level bids in the Alert chart. Similarly, I think 5 card or shorter 3-level preempts are also illegal. I wrote the ACBL rules dept. and the idea that you could have an agreement to open a weak 2 with a 4 card or shorter suit was described as "hogwash".

[mikestar13]

I wouldn't care to bid 3♣ with these cards--what I learned back in the day was the (oversimplified) rule that at least half your HCP should be in your long suit. This is more or less the standard I would play in partnership that was playing middle-of-the-road preempts. It is possible to make other agreements, it might be desirable. IMHO, it doesn't hurt to pre-alert your preemptive style whether legally required or not.

[Stephen Tu]

johnu, on 2016-May-09, 17:48, said:

Opening 4 card or shorter weak 2's in the ACBL is a disallowed convention. I thought this was clear from reading the definitions of 2 and 3 level bids in the Alert chart. Similarly, I think 5 card or shorter 3-level preempts are also illegal. I wrote the ACBL rules dept. and the idea that you could have an agreement to open a weak 2 with a 4 card or shorter suit was described as "hogwash".

I don't think the ACBL can regulate natural bids. You can't play conventional responses to these weak twos, but I'm pretty sure you can open them if you want. Just like you can play an 8-10 opening 1nt range if you wanted to, just can't play any sort of stayman/transfers over it.

Personally, if my opponent wants to preempt at 3-level with 5 cd suit frequently, I want to let him.

[PhilG007]

Personally,I've never liked WJO's In my experience they're more of a liability than an asset.
What frequently occurs is that LHO is sitting with the remainder of the suit then the next thing
that happens is "DOUBLE"and then...you can guess the rest (!)

[helene_t]

Stephen Tu, on 2016-May-09, 21:20, said:

I don't think the ACBL can regulate natural bids. You can't play conventional responses to these weak twos, but I'm pretty sure you can open them if you want.

They actually can ban them, since the latest law ammendments.

[johnu]

Stephen Tu, on 2016-May-09, 21:20, said:

I don't think the ACBL can regulate natural bids.

If you look at the definitions of natural bid, treatments, and conventions in the GCC and the (especially the bottom of) Alert Charts, they are saying that 4 card weak 2's and 5 card 3-bids are not valid treatments of a natural bid, but are conventions. Conventions are regulated in the convention charts.