[CSGibson]

Scoring: IMP

P-(1♠)-2♦-(X),
2♠-(3♣)-P-(P),
4♣-(X)*-4♦-(P),
5♦-(P)-P-X,
All pass

*suggesting that partner should not lead a club

---

We were able to get out of it for down 1 when Hx of hearts was with West and diamonds were 2-2, but it was still not a great result.

[gnasher]

I wouldn't have overcalled 2♦, but the later auction deserves scrutiny.

When North passed over 3♣, did that show a worse hand than bidding 3♦?

When North bid 4♦ over double, did that show a worse hand than passing?

If the answer to both questions is yes (which would be surprising), then South effectively raised 2♦ to 5♦, which seems a bit too much. If North, in fact, showed interest with one of these actions, I blame North.

[CSGibson]

gnasher, on Jun 22 2009, 09:11 AM, said:

I wouldn't have overcalled 2♦, but the later auction deserves scrutiny.

When North passed over 3♣, did that show a worse hand than bidding 3♦?

When North bid 4♦ over double, did that show a worse hand than passing?

If the answer to both questions is yes (which would be surprising), then South effectively raised 2♦ to 5♦, which seems a bit too much.  If North, in fact, showed interest with one of these actions, I blame North.

Passing showed a better hand than 3♦ would. 4♦ was weaker than passing.

[jdonn]

2♦ was obviously a joke. And since I think, regardless of the details of how it went, south does have a (clear!) game force opposite a 2 level overcall in diamonds, the blame is 100% north.

Also, though I've never discussed it, it seems clear to me that north's pass over the double of 4♣ would not be suggestive of hand strength. You get to do that once per auction (over 3♣ in this case), not some unlimited amount of times where you narrow your strength to infinitly small ranges.

[CSGibson]

jdonn, on Jun 22 2009, 09:19 AM, said:

2♦ was obviously a joke. And since I think, regardless of the details of how it went, south does have a (clear!) game force opposite a 2 level overcall in diamonds, the blame is 100% north.

Also, though I've never discussed it, it seems clear to me that north's pass over the double of 4♣ would not be suggestive of hand strength. You get to do that once per auction (over 3♣ in this case), not some unlimited amount of times where you narrow your strength to infinitly small ranges.

I think pass over 4 clubs invites partner to XX with first round control or cue-bid again, and establishes slam interest, which is why I said that 4 diamonds is weaker. Maybe that isn't sensible.

[jdonn]

Considering north passed over 3♣, supposedly showing extras, that sort of agreement should not be in the hands of this partnership anyway.

[neilkaz]

jdonn, on Jun 22 2009, 11:43 AM, said:

Considering north passed over 3♣, supposedly showing extras, that sort of agreement should not be in the hands of this partnership anyway.

How North can pass over 3♣ if that shows extras is beyond me. I am also not overcalling 2♦ here.

[RichMor]

South cue bid twice.

That was enough, wasn't it.

[peachy]

North. Started the mess with the overcall.

[skjaeran]

The north hand isn't even close to a vulnerable overcall.

Facing a reasonable overcall, south has a clear GF. It's not hard to find a normal hand for north were slam is very good, you might in fact have a grand.

Whatever happened after the overcall, north is 100% to blame.

[kfay]

You must be joking with this 2♦ bid.

Good players know how to use the pass card. Overcalling 2m on POS is one of the areas where n00bs get what's coming to them most.

[mikeh]

skaeran, on Jun 22 2009, 01:27 PM, said:

The north hand isn't even close to a vulnerable overcall.

Facing a reasonable overcall, south has a clear GF. It's not hard to find a normal hand for north were slam is very good, you might in fact have a grand.

Whatever happened after the overcall, north is 100% to blame.

This is very sensible... I agree with Harald and with Josh, whose post was much the same, tho more strongly worded

Anyone who blames South must bid like North.

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Jun 22 2009, 04:58 PM, said:

Anyone who blames South must bid like North.

Lol I like that, it's a good answer to many of the ATB problems, just rearranging the players.

[MFA]

North's 2♦ is not bridge. He gets the full blame. South has a normal gameforce, at others also have pointed out.

That being said, I don't understand what south's bidding was showing?! 2♠ was a diamond raise, but what about either splintering at some point or introduce hearts?!

[655321]

Obviously the 2♦ bid was unbelievably bad, so bad that I am not sure why this hand was posted. Didn't pay much attention to the long rest of the auction.