[mfa1010]

2♦ is ok, I'd bid it. Could be bad, but if we have a big fit and they have spades, I will be very happy to have overcalled.
3♦ vul/vul is begging for a bad board, so little upside.

[Fluffy]

pretty much like Andy, I would rather bid 3♦ than 2, reserving 2♦ for hands I'd at least open at the 1 level.

[MrAce]

Commentator : N could have overcalled 2♦ over 1♠, would you Alfredo ?

Versace : Not vulnerable, yes non vulnerable, with this weak hand now i need 6-4 to bid 2♦

[PhilKing]

 MrAce, on 2013-July-17, 19:05, said:

Commentator : N could have overcalled 2♦ over 1♠, would you Alfredo ?

Versace : Not vulnerable, yes non vulnerable, with this weak hand now i need 6-4 to bid 2♦

Obvious disinformation - the only reason he is commentating is to give off false reads.

[MrAce]

 PhilKing, on 2013-July-18, 13:27, said:

Obvious disinformation - the only reason he is commentating is to give off false reads.

Wow...you really seem to not give much credit to his intentions. Is it because he once in his life overcalled with QTxxx and out ? Or do you have more of similar examples ?

[PhilKing]

 MrAce, on 2013-July-18, 13:56, said:

Wow...you really seem to not give much credit to his intentions. Is it because he once in his life overcalled with QTxxx and out ? Or do you have more of similar examples ?

Sorry - forgot smiley wink face.

The ultra-weak examples I have come across are all NV, and it is clearly marked on his CC.

[c_corgi]

South is likely to have some sort of hand with hearts. Overcalling 2D is likely to give him more opportunity to show hearts, either through a negative double or through the reduced the strength requirement for 2H over 2D (compared to 2H over pass). To what extent is it advantageous to deny (by passing) South the opportunity to describe these hands with hearts, and how much does the bad heart break influence this?

[wank]

really hate 3 diamonds. far too much offence to defence to try so hard to go for a penalty.

if lho has 3 spades they'll play in spades. then you only need partner to have the ace of hearts and you'll probably take the first 4 tricks.

if lho doesn't have 3 spades diamonds is going to play terribly if they manage to catch you.

[paulg]

 MrAce, on 2013-July-17, 19:05, said:

Commentator : N could have overcalled 2♦ over 1♠, would you Alfredo ?

Versace : Not vulnerable, yes non vulnerable, with this weak hand now i need 6-4 to bid 2♦

 PhilKing, on 2013-July-18, 13:27, said:

Obvious disinformation - the only reason he is commentating is to give off false reads.

Of course he is not talking for Lauria who would overcall two diamonds at any vulnerability.

[mike777]

guys you do understand you comments confusing.....


2d or not? and why?

[Phil]

I confess I would pass at teams. Seems the information we give them is more valuable than telling my partner I have a lot of diamonds.

I'm curious about the 'whys' of overcalling 2♦ on a hand like this. My case against 2♦ is:

- its not at all preemptive - and unlikely we can shut out their hearts;
- the lead directing element is negligible because we'll be on lead against spades, and a lot of the time partner can lead a diamond themselves against hearts, although if I make the overcall then I'll be on lead anyway a lot against hearts
- with partner being a passed hand makes it unlikely we can successfully compete for any part score

I realize there are some pretty wow results when we overcall that lands us some gin 5♦ (or -1) against their 4♠ but this seems like an outlier to me.

[gszes]

PASS

I will continue to abuse my green card and save my preempts for a time when
I actually want p to be looking for a sac (i.e. favorable then I bid 3d).

take one of my small spades and convert it to the club K (not the heart K)
and I'll bid 2d.

[Siegmund]

I have sympathy for 3D and have done it against unsound opponents at times. 2D would not even cross my mind unless I was a full trick better.

Now, if the rules allowed me to make a weak jump to 2D over 1S, that would be perfect.

[mfa1010]

I would be surprised if Versace even remotely considered 3♦.

[EricK]

 Siegmund, on 2013-July-21, 14:56, said:

I have sympathy for 3D and have done it against unsound opponents at times. 2D would not even cross my mind unless I was a full trick better.

Now, if the rules allowed me to make a weak jump to 2D over 1S, that would be perfect.

They do allow it*. eg that is what an EHAA 2 level overcall is. You just have to agree it with partner

* They don't allow you to call it a "jump", of course

[rhm]

 mike777, on 2013-July-19, 02:41, said:

guys you do understand you comments confusing.....


2d or not? and why?

The issue is really whether you believe in the philosophy that a simple overcall should be "strong" because jump overcalls are "weak".
Having played that way for a long time, I have come to the conclusion, that you loose too many opportunities to overcall when you just can not afford to jump overcall. This philosophy also induces many to insane jump overcalls with the wrong hand.
This hand is somewhat a reasonable example.
The hand is unsuitable for 3♦. Just too risky in my opinion. Those, who consider 3♦ are losers against strong opposition.
Suitable vulnerable weak jump overcalls are rare in my opinion.
When RHO has already opened a jump to the three level should be a substantially better preempt than a 3 level preempt when you are dealer.
Your risk is higher getting caught speeding and your gain is less when RHO has opened already.
But overcalling 2♦ has lots of ways to win. The risk of getting caught is much lower and if, you are paying out 300 points fewer.
You direct a lead and you take away bidding room from opponents. Their bidding usually gets less precise.
After all it could be your hand.

Of course if partner expects more, because he believes in the above philosophy you can not overcall and when you do overcall with the above philosophy you are better positioned on stronger hands.
Nevertheless I have lost faith in this philosophy.

Rainer Herrmann

[PhilKing]

I asked my bidding guru (Zia) what he would do and the answer was to pass at imps and bid 2♦ at matchpoints.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 facing an unpassed partner - No, if partner had the chance to bid, Yes.
#2 an add. King, maybe a Queen

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mfa1010]

 PhilKing, on 2013-July-23, 16:31, said:

I asked my bidding guru (Zia) what he would do and the answer was to pass at imps and bid 2♦ at matchpoints.

Getting old...