1NT interference
#1
Posted 2009-September-13, 14:43
2/1, strongish NT (15-16, if interested)...
When 1NT is overcalled, I wonder if it is EVER (or often enough to be considered) a good score to let the opponents play in 2x? I am messing with an already-messed-with Lebensohl, trying to transfer at a lower level by incorporating the much-maligned shadow double. To avoid giving up the penalty double, the current plan is to use a forcing pass over 2-level interference: It forces opener to double, after which responder will pass with a penalty double, or take out to show certain specific 2-suiters.
This does mean I have to take some other sort of action with a 4333 2-pointer, but I am telling myself that, with THAT hand, we're not winning the auction anyway, and that it will be difficult for opps to stop off for a penalty when they haven't finished looking for a fit (especially when the 2x bid was some artificial thingie).
Anyhow, the gist of the question is whether the "resistance is mandatory" idea is sound: Do you ever get a good score by giving up meekly when the opps overcall a strong 1NT? And if so, how often does it happen?
Many thanks
#2
Posted 2009-September-13, 15:11
#3
Posted 2009-September-13, 21:31
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#4
Posted 2009-September-13, 21:37
The issue is that automatically bidding over their overcall often turns a normal (perhaps average minus) result into a huge disaster. This will be true almost every time responder is balanced and weak (for example).
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#5
Posted 2009-September-14, 02:47
And the card play hasn't even started yet.
To me it sounds like panic.
#6
Posted 2009-September-14, 04:22
MFA, on Sep 14 2009, 03:47 PM, said:
And the card play hasn't even started yet.
To me it sounds like panic.
Panic is a good phrase. Agree with that.
#8
Posted 2009-September-14, 08:54
Using double as takeout or "stolen" knocks out many chances for serious penalty of frivolous actions over our NT. We still have Leben to compete if we need it, and pass to signify we don't want to compete.
#9
Posted 2009-September-14, 09:18
--Always remember you're unique. Just like everyone else.
#10
Posted 2009-September-14, 10:50
#11
Posted 2009-September-14, 15:30
If you play double is takeout, immediate suit bid is a one suiter and pulling the forced double is a two suiter, won't you also have problems with perfectly ordinary moderate balanced hands unsuited for a takeout double, where you would just choose a contract after partner's takeout double?
#12
Posted 2009-September-14, 17:34
nigel_k, on Sep 14 2009, 09:30 PM, said:
If you play double is takeout, immediate suit bid is a one suiter and pulling the forced double is a two suiter, won't you also have problems with perfectly ordinary moderate balanced hands unsuited for a takeout double, where you would just choose a contract after partner's takeout double?
I don't understand this one: There;s no takeout double to replace; The double I'm replacing with the relay is the penalty double. That "moderate balanced hand" is in there, too, but my interest was mostly the frequency of a 1N (2x) p-p-p sequence. And, despite the opinions here, it still seems to me I never see that happen. (purely subjective; that's why I was asking)