[Fluffy]

---

2♥ = weak with both majors, Match Points.

[hrothgar]

Fluffy, on 2014-July-28, 09:56, said:

---

2♥ = weak with both majors, Match Points.

Would be nice to know what your methods are.
Would be even nicer to know what shapes 2!H shows.

With this said and done, if the opps are playig assumed fit type methods, I'd double
If they're promising a 5-5, I'd probably pass

[whereagles]

2NT. Get it off your chest right away.

[kuhchung]

Never played against methods like these, so I'm passing and blaming them for fixing me

[the_clown]

Very close between pass and 2NT, double and 3♦ both look pretty bad to me.

[hrothgar]

whereagles, on 2014-July-28, 11:20, said:

2NT. Get it off your chest right away.

A 2NT overcall is suicidal and using this bid as natural is ill conceived at best.

A significant fraction of the good results playing assumed fit methods occur when the opponents overcall on crap.

Moreover, a natural 2NT overcall gives you no good way to declare 3m
Most of your NT structure is devoted towards exploring for major suit fits.

If you are going to bid with this hand, your best option is to double, hoping to penalize them at the two level.
If things go south, you can bail out in 3m

[Winstonm]

I see nothing to do but pass - in this type fix I would rather underbid than overbid my hand, so I rule out 2NT. This hand will still be difficult when and if partner balances. Sometimes its best not to rock the boat.

[manudude03]

I play double as 12+-15 balanced, I double here, even though I'm not too happy about being 5-2 in the minors. At least it is 3352 instead of 3325.

[chasetb]

hrothgar, on 2014-July-28, 11:17, said:

Would be nice to know what your methods are.
Would be even nicer to know what shapes 2!H shows.

With this said and done, if the opps are playing assumed fit type methods, I'd double
If they're promising a 5-5, I'd probably pass

Funny you say that, because in a Kraft-Kokish weak NT system I have, his two defenses advocate the opposite. The 5-5 hands double with a Weak NT, and the 4-4 hands pass (double here shows both minors or a 20+ HCP (semi)-balanced hand). Hence why I doubled.

Check out pages 363-4 of the link above.

[hrothgar]

chasetb, on 2014-July-28, 16:57, said:

Funny you say that, because in a Kraft-Kokish weak NT system I have, his two defenses advocate the opposite. The 5-5 hands double with a Weak NT, and the 4-4 hands pass (double here shows both minors or a 20+ HCP (semi)-balanced hand). Hence why I doubled.

Check out pages 363-4 of the link above.

Interesting. Playing against an assumed fit 2H opening, Kokish prefers doubling for takeout.
Most of the defenses that I've seen from Scandinavia where these methods aren't infrequent advocate doubling with balanced hands and trying for penalties.

[f0rdy]

hrothgar, on 2014-July-28, 18:01, said:

Interesting. Playing against an assumed fit 2H opening, Kokish prefers doubling for takeout.
Most of the defenses that I've seen from Scandinavia where these methods aren't infrequent advocate doubling with balanced hands and trying for penalties.

How often does the intervening side actually get to take a penalty? I've always played something similar to what you describe, but I've rarely come up against assumed-fit methods for more than a board or two in a pairs event, and so I can't remember ever getting to the point of penalising.

The combination of encountering assumed-fit fairly infrequently and (in my case) usually playing in semi-pickup partnerships means that actually I think what we've generally played is: Sit down and see they play Ekrens; entire discussion is "Same defense as Multi? Major overcalls are natural, try to penalise them?".
But as nearly everyone I play with tends to agree Dixon by default as a Multi defense, that means we end up with a double for weak-ish balanced hands.

[the hog]

Pass. Get my hand off my chest straight away.

[wank]

against the 4-4 variant you want a take out double so you can find your spade fit. not being able to play 4s because someone has jxxx is too weak.

[fbuijsen]

hrothgar, on 2014-July-28, 12:48, said:

A 2NT overcall is suicidal and using this bid as natural is ill conceived at best.

I play this exact 2♥ opening this way (majors 4-4 or better), and am convinced that a natural 2NT overcall (16-18) is the best way to play against this -- or possibly any other method that allows you to show 16-18 balanced in another way.
I have had the situation against strong opponents several times where they bid to a sharp 3NT and the opponents (us) are given the task of finding the right major to start.

That said, stretiching this hand to 16 HCP looks like a very big overbid to me. I consider this one close between 3♦ and pass. Doubling and hoping to find a good fit in a major still is overly optimistic in my view.

[whereagles]

what if you're playing 15-17 2NT overcall? would that be a stretch to you?

[hrothgar]

fbuijsen, on 2014-July-29, 02:56, said:

I play this exact 2♥ opening this way (majors 4-4 or better), and am convinced that a natural 2NT overcall (16-18) is the best way to play against this -- or possibly any other method that allows you to show 16-18 balanced in another way.

I agree that having some way to show a strong balanced hand is useful. I am adamant that a 2NT overcall is not the right way to go.

As I mentioned previously, I think that its important that advancer be able to sign off in either minor as well as asking the overcaller to express preference between the minors. There just isn't enough bidding space to do so. If you want to use a bid to show some strong balanced range, I think that its better to use 2♠ rather than 2NT.

(You can then use a 2NT advance as puppet to 3C, and uses 3C as asking overcaller to choose between the minors)

[mikeh]

chasetb, on 2014-July-28, 16:57, said:

Funny you say that, because in a Kraft-Kokish weak NT system I have, his two defenses advocate the opposite. The 5-5 hands double with a Weak NT, and the 4-4 hands pass (double here shows both minors or a 20+ HCP (semi)-balanced hand). Hence why I doubled.

Check out pages 363-4 of the link above.

Funny you should say that

My notes from Kokish are about 3 years old, but he sent my team a lot of suggested defences to a range of openings to help us prepare for a BB (our subsequent dreadful play wasn't because we didn't have defences!), and his notes for this 2♥ opening suggest double to show 13-15 balanced or 19+, with 2N being natural 16-18+.


Since imo Kokish is one of the two or three best bridge theorists in the world, and imo the best in terms of analyzing how to deal with arcane methods (I appreciate that many of the methods we as NA's see as arcane are ordinary to the rest of the world), I tend to accept this as the optimal strategy and would double with this hand.

We may have a problem if partner bids 3♣, value showing and natural but non-forcing....I'd pass and hope....and if he bids 2N, lebensohl.

In essence, the double is intended to help us get to 3N without being as aggressive and misleading as an immediate 2N would be.

I actually think pass is a better 2nd choice than 2N.

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on 2014-July-29, 10:06, said:

Funny you should say that

My notes from Kokish are about 3 years old, but he sent my team a lot of suggested defences to a range of openings to help us prepare for a BB (our subsequent dreadful play wasn't because we didn't have defences!), and his notes for this 2♥ opening suggest double to show 13-15 balanced or 19+, with 2N being natural 16-18+.


Since imo Kokish is one of the two or three best bridge theorists in the world, and imo the best in terms of analyzing how to deal with arcane methods (I appreciate that many of the methods we as NA's see as arcane are ordinary to the rest of the world), I tend to accept this as the optimal strategy and would double with this hand.

We may have a problem if partner bids 3♣, value showing and natural but non-forcing....I'd pass and hope....and if he bids 2N, lebensohl.

In essence, the double is intended to help us get to 3N without being as aggressive and misleading as an immediate 2N would be.

I actually think pass is a better 2nd choice than 2N.

But did Kokish address that you might have a different defence against 4+4+ or 5+5+?, its funny that I have always palyed 2 suited openings as 5+4+

[hrothgar]

Fluffy, on 2014-July-29, 11:21, said:

But did Kokish address that you might have a different defence against 4+4+ or 5+5+?, its funny that I have always palyed 2 suited openings as 5+4+

Even if you play the same defense against 4-4 and 5-5 patterns, I think that it is reasonable to vary your choice of whether or not to double based on the expected ODR in the opponents hand. I'm willing to be more aggressive about trying to collect a penalty if the opps will open with a 4-4 pattern than if they insist on a 5-5

[whereagles]

what's this 5-5 talk? they always do it on 5-4s lol