[Phil]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-June-17, 14:36, said:

I don't think the patronising tone is necessary. Partner has a magic hand, some very similar hands are no good.

Well, I could say, 'passing is stupid', but I doubt you'd like that much either.

Quote

xx, QJx, Axxx, xxxx is close to no play on a diamond lead for example.

A diamond lead? On this auction? Not only are we choosing examples to justify our pass, but now we are also choosing leads that prevent a making line? I'm sorry if that sounds patronizing, but you won't win points around here doing that.

LHO is frequently leading a club from Qx/Jx. Even with a diamond lead, I actually have some interesting chances when RHO holds all the goods and a doubleton diamond (I think). 3N is awesome with this hand by the way.

Quote

xx, QJx, QJxxx, Qxx is also not making.

True, 4♠ will not make. Again, 3N has chances; perhaps with these quacks partner would try harder for 3N? Maybe we should?

Quote

Ax, Qxx, Qxxx, xxxx next to no play on a trump lead.

I agree, but its unfortunate our LHO has the hand records.

Quote

xx, AQx, Qxxx, xxxx well maybe 20% for the K♥ to be in the weak hand.

At least you didn't say, "4♠ has next to no play on a heart lead".

Quote

There is however the chance of a club lead so your practical chances are better than your theoretical chances.

Yes. And if I am being objective, I will concede that 4-1 or 5-1 clubs are a concern.

By the way, based on the above examples, I think we should at least 'consider' the merits of 3N over 3♠.

[cherdano]

This thread has become weird. As gnasher said, partner already should do more than 1NT. Nevertheless, I understand 1NT, maybe 2C is taken as showing a fit.
But having found a fit I don't understand bidding a timid 3♠, this is an obvious game bid.

[the hog]

I would probably also have overcalled 1S. I think partner should bid more than the 1NT bid. However, given partner's bidding, I agree with your pass. You have shown your hand, and you are at the bottom end of the sequence you have produced.

[mtvesuvius]

Hmm, I guess I'll need to rethink my position: I agree with the hog

[benlessard]

I wouldnt reach game on this 1 since its a 1S overcall for me. But if I X and 1S I think that partner should bid 3D or game and not 3S. 3D is not a correction and show D concentration wich make a 4S bid so easy. Over 3S its a clearcut pass.

[whereagles]

It's teams, so really a no-brainer 4 after pard's raise. When in doubt, bid game.

The "I've shown my hand" argument is the unlucky expert way to miss out on a game everybody but him bids.

[Cyberyeti]

whereagles, on 2011-June-20, 14:50, said:

It's teams, so really a no-brainer 4 after pard's raise. When in doubt, bid game.

The "I've shown my hand" argument is the unlucky expert way to miss out on a game everybody but him bids.

Yeah, but this is an "I've overbid my hand already" not "I've shown my hand". Partner needs to do more if anybody does.

As to Phil's comments. I said it's no play on some odd leads, in most cases it's not good on other leads, just not completely no play. Also the leader will be assuming his partner has pretty much a weak no trump a lot of the time with the likelihood he has 4 clubs, so he may not rush to lead a non singleton club.

Having discussed this with partner, our auction would go (1♣)-1♠-1N-2♣-3♣-4♠, our overcalls are very sound, we respond on most hands we'd respond to an opening bid. 2♣ shows a big hand with nothing else sensible to bid and is GF unless partner is flat broke, 3♣ is just a "not flat broke, don't know where I'm going" bid.

[whereagles]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-June-20, 15:38, said:

Yeah, but this is an "I've overbid my hand already" not "I've shown my hand". Partner needs to do more if anybody does.

Sorry, but I think this is an error. You're forcing the weak hand, a hand aching to pass, to make key decisions. No wonder underbids occur.

I think advancer bid properly. 1NT cannot be too weakish and the raise to 3♠ is adequate, given the dubious value of the diamond queen and lack of a good fit. It's really a "when in doubt, bid game" situation and doubler did not realize it was his job to bid game.

[Cyberyeti]

whereagles, on 2011-June-21, 03:47, said:

Sorry, but I think this is an error. You're forcing the weak hand, a hand aching to pass, to make key decisions. No wonder underbids occur.

I think advancer bid properly. 1NT cannot be too weakish and the raise to 3♠ is adequate, given the dubious value of the diamond queen and lack of a good fit. It's really a "when in doubt, bid game" situation and doubler did not realize it was his job to bid game.

We simple overcall on broadly the same 11-19 that we open (our WJOs are 0-10, and don't need 6 cards), this isn't close by our methods, at least half a playing trick shy of double then bid.

I have around 1.7 tricks, I'd estimate a likely 12/18/3 point split round the table for points when pard bids 2♣ in my auction or doubles then bids in yours, so around 21/33 chance of 2 tricks, but a possible Jx/Jxx, in partner's hand adds a bit extra so the Q♦ is less dubious than you think. Partner has around 8 tricks in my auction so we're in the region where we want to bid this.

[rhm]

whereagles, on 2011-June-21, 03:47, said:

Sorry, but I think this is an error. You're forcing the weak hand, a hand aching to pass, to make key decisions. No wonder underbids occur.

I think advancer bid properly. 1NT cannot be too weakish and the raise to 3♠ is adequate, given the dubious value of the diamond queen and lack of a good fit. It's really a "when in doubt, bid game" situation and doubler did not realize it was his job to bid game.

I agree, but of course it all depends what you expect when somebody doubles and then over-calls. If you expect a rock crusher advancer has to force to game.
So the whole discussion is somewhat useless. All depends on your agreements.
The trend, particularly in the US, is to play double followed by a suit overcall stronger and stronger.

While I agree in general everything can be overdone and this trend is not without disadvantages.
One level over-calls become very wide ranging, which also can lead to missed or hopeless games and opponents usually do not give you a free ride when your partner over-calls. Part-score battles lost to the opening side are frequent, because the opening side has usually a much better knowledge about their combined strength.
If you hold ♠, there is no need to play double followed by a ♠ bid as super-strong.
My general rule is that double followed by a suit bid is game forcing, if partner has jumped in response to the takeout double.
This hand is more than good enough to double first. I would have much more sympathy with the immediate over-callers if the long suit would have been ♥.

Rainer Herrmann

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think you should accept the invite.

I just ask my self, would I bid game if p showed 8-9HCP and
secondary support, the answer is yes.

Add to this the fact, that you know, where most of their points
are located, that should improve your chances.

I would have passed 2S with partners hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Free]

I would also accept the invite. Your ♦K will probably get some support (Ace means only 4 losers, Q means 5 losers) and partner invites so he should have something else than just 1 ♦ honour.

[whereagles]

I think it's not a matter of what doubler shows, but rather what advancer has...

The strong hand, regardless of having "shown" this or that, should make the final call. This is because the strong hand is more independant.

[han]

Nuno, have you read the book "why you lose at bridge", by S.J. Simons?

[whereagles]

yeah I have. What's your point?

[benlessard]

There is a lot of things i completly disagree here. Ill post my reasoning of the hand its going to be simple tahtn criticizing pts one by one.

I would overcall 1S but i have no problems for lower standard X and bid. Both style are surely playable and i dont think one style is better than the other. Note that here we hold spades vs a 1c opening so its the perfect situation for having lower requirement of X and bid. So assume X and 1S is in (decent 16)-bad22 pts range. (some will say 22 is too much but i have to disagree) it not hard to see 22 count that will go down at the 2 level facing a entryless dummy having 1S heavy and expecting partner to continue with thin values make more sense than asking overcaller to bid at the 2 level with borderline hands.

Over 1S responder should keep the auction open with any 4 count Imo even with crappy one. The 1 nt rebid is clearly an underbid here but since we dont have a stopper its reasonnable. It suggest a club card, Overcaller AKT in clubs is really looking like 3 clubs tricks now, but advancer will often downgrade the Q of clubs. 2S is normal and suggest a vgood 16 to bad 20. I think 2S is normal since many of responder H holdings will be disapointing. Over 2S the position should be simple, with 2 working cards you bid game (A+Qs is automatic 4S), with 1 you pass with 1.5/scattered values you make game tries. The key in those situtaion is to make the game try in the soft values, Aces are always good k/q not always. I think responder has a clean maximum and can bid 4S. If he want to make a game try a this point he should bid something like

2NT = no fit
3C = K/Q of clubs + 1 other card (most likely a D card)
3D = K/Q of D + 1 other card (most likely 2D cards)
3H = soft H values (H+D or H+S)
3S = scattered values (3Q or 2Q + 2J etc).

I really hate the 3S bid

1- the hands is slightly too strong.
2- AQ is in the same suit so why not bid 3D ?


After the 3S i see responder having something like

xx
Hxx (not the A)
Qxxx
Jxxx

[han]

whereagles, on 2011-June-21, 13:25, said:

yeah I have. What's your point?

Your posts in this thread reminded me of this book. I believe Simons claimed that poor players bid too much with strong hands and too little with weak hands.

[whereagles]

Han come on, that has nothing to do with it and you bloody well know it

[whereagles]

benlessard, on 2011-June-21, 19:34, said:

After the 3S i see responder having something like

xx
Hxx (not the A)
Qxxx
Jxxx

That certainly is a possibility, but the point is you don't really know whether the hands can fit badly (like your case) or well (like the actual case). Thus, "when in doubt..." Heck, it can hardly be doubled for -2 and it might make. That's what bidding thin games is for.

[gwnn]

I don't understand these arguments, what if I open a 15-17 NT and partner invites (2♦ then 3♥), do you also bid game on all 15 counts because you don't know how well the hands fit? And if I pass because I've shown my range and I feel I'm a minimum, does that make me an unlucky expert?