[fourdad]

I would suggest a TOX.

[Stephen Tu]

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 12:10, said:

From what I understand, in this use case lebonsohl is used after the takeout double of a weak 2 bid by the responder. I wasn't and am still not really certain it would work invoked for overcalls and advances.

Quickly applying lebonsohl:

overcalls of 2 of higher suit would still be natural and non-forcing
overcalls of 2NT puppets a 3 club (3 level continuations would work)
overcalls of 3 of a suit could still be game forcing

You are quite confused about Lebensohl. For int+ players playing more gadgets (generally not used by beginners/novices), Lebensohl is used by the advancer of a takeout double, the partner of the person who made the takeout double. It helps to understand the reasoning why people want to play Lebensohl, so that you can understand better why you likely would *not* want to use Lebensohl to an advance an overcall, or use a 2nt artificial overcall.

Over a takeout double, the main problem is that a takeout double requires a response regardless of strength, because passing is rarely a reasonable option, requiring a fairly strong trump holding. With advancer not having enough strength to force game, you don't know if the 3♦ advance is on a 4 count or on a 9 count, which could well affect whether you want to bid any further. Lebensohl functions to separate the moderate hands from the weak ones.

Over say a 2s overcall, on the other hand, you don't really have this problem quite as much. Weak hands can simply pass the overcall, a lot more often than passing a takeout double, and be in a reasonable spot. On this hand, would you like to be able to bid a non-forcing 3 diamonds, or play some scheme using 2nt artificially to puppet to 3d or some transfer scheme? Sure. But that compromises your bids with stronger hands, if you had a natural 2nt bid (~10-11 points or thereabouts with a heart stopper), you'd now be forced to overbid to 3nt instead. Most people think this is too much to give up to be able to get to a 3 diamond partial, and are content to simply play 2 spades in such cases.

The other thing I think you are proposing is using the 2nt in the overcall position itself as artificial. This is bizarre, with tremendous problems:
- you can't bid 2nt anymore with 15/16-18 balanced. What will you do instead? Or if you do, responder can no longer pass if weak, you end up forcing way too high.
- you seem to want to be able to overcall 3m forcing over 2♥. These strong overcalls can normally be handled by doubling first, or sometimes cue bidding 3h directly asking for a stopper for 3nt (running to 4m if partner doesn't have a stopper), or sometimes by overcalling 3nt yourself if you have the stopper. There's no particular need to use 2nt artificially to distinguish ranges for 3m overcalls.
- if the person in the overcall position over 2H wants to find out about partner's 4 cd majors, strength range, and holding a stopper or not, he can do these things more economically with a takeout double, rather than a forcing 2nt bid.

Generally the problem of distinguishing strength ranges for overcaller's actions over a weak two is by either takeout doubling first, or making a jump overcall (strong over preempts, unlike weak jump overcalls typically played vs. opponent's one-openings) vs. making a simple non-forcing overcall. It's not necessary to give up 2nt for this sort of purpose.

[wclucas42]

Stephen Tu, on 2014-November-25, 16:28, said:

You are quite confused about Lebensohl. For int+ players playing more gadgets (generally not used by beginners/novices), Lebensohl is used by the advancer of a takeout double, the partner of the person who made the takeout double. It helps to understand the reasoning why people want to play Lebensohl, so that you can understand better why you likely would *not* want to use Lebensohl to an advance an overcall, or use a 2nt artificial overcall.

Wow, first let me say thanks for taking the time write such a thought out response. I think you helped me clarify my thoughts if nothing else.

I don't think I am overly confused about the convention though, from my reply you quoted: "From what I understand, in this use case lebonsohl is used after the takeout double of a weak 2 bid by the responder. _I wasn't and am still not really certain it would work invoked for overcalls and advances_" the rest of the post is me talking through what it would mean to try and apply it and unfortunately you stopped quoting right where I started expressing my doubts. to fill in the rest of the quote:

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 12:10, said:

overcalls of 3 level cue bid, could still be Stayman w/o stopper (I don't know what advancer would do here with out stops in the opps suit and no 4 card major, is a new suit to play? How could he force? if short in opps suit, how could he show a long minor with slam interest? It's not like he can retreat to a previously bid suit so sign off and forces become problematic)

3NT makes me a little sick to my stomach, but transfers the problem nicely.

Being able to apply lebonsohl here has the advantage of one fewer gadget to memorize, but it seems like it will wrong side more contracts than 4 suit transfers... and as nekthen points out, I also lose the ability to pass in 2 NT as it is now a puppet bid.

This I think sums up my concerns about using lebonsohl during overcalls and advances.

Stephen Tu, on 2014-November-25, 16:28, said:

Over a takeout double, the main problem is that a takeout double requires a response regardless of strength, because passing is rarely a reasonable option, requiring a fairly strong trump holding. With advancer not having enough strength to force game, you don't know if the 3♦ advance is on a 4 count or on a 9 count, which could well affect whether you want to bid any further.

I think this is a great rationale of why I didn't want to use a TOX in the original problem hand I posted, you said it better than I could.

Stephen Tu, on 2014-November-25, 16:28, said:

Over say a 2s overcall, on the other hand, you don't really have this problem quite as much. Weak hands can simply pass the overcall, a lot more often than passing a takeout double, and be in a reasonable spot. On this hand, would you like to be able to bid a non-forcing 3 diamonds, or play some scheme using 2nt artificially to puppet to 3d or some transfer scheme? Sure. But that compromises your bids with stronger hands, if you had a natural 2nt bid (~10-11 points or thereabouts with a heart stopper), you'd now be forced to overbid to 3nt instead. Most people think this is too much to give up to be able to get to a 3 diamond partial, and are content to simply play 2 spades in such cases.

I currently play 2NT overcalls of weak 2s as showing a strong 1 NT (~15 - 17) opener with a stop. (See post #5 for my current scheme), your strength above is a fair bit less than mine, although three lines later you say "you can't bid 2nt anymore with 15/16-18 balanced." So are you suggesting ~10 - 11 w/ stops in opps suit or 15/16-18 w/o stops?

I also think a 2 spades overcall gets passed regardless on this hand. a 2Nt overcall though would allow for advancer to pass, raise to 3NT or transfer, and I think the scheme in post #17 might be superior to the one I currently use (outlined in post #5

Stephen Tu, on 2014-November-25, 16:28, said:

The other thing I think you are proposing is using the 2nt in the overcall position itself as artificial. This is bizarre, with tremendous problems:
- you can't bid 2nt anymore with 15/16-18 balanced. What will you do instead? Or if you do, responder can no longer pass if weak, you end up forcing way too high.
- you seem to want to be able to overcall 3m forcing over 2♥. These strong overcalls can normally be handled by doubling first, or sometimes cue bidding 3h directly asking for a stopper for 3nt (running to 4m if partner doesn't have a stopper), or sometimes by overcalling 3nt yourself if you have the stopper. There's no particular need to use 2nt artificially to distinguish ranges for 3m overcalls.
- if the person in the overcall position over 2H wants to find out about partner's 4 cd majors, strength range, and holding a stopper or not, he can do these things more economically with a takeout double, rather than a forcing 2nt bid.

Generally the problem of distinguishing strength ranges for overcaller's actions over a weak two is by either takeout doubling first, or making a jump overcall (strong over preempts, unlike weak jump overcalls typically played vs. opponent's one-openings) vs. making a simple non-forcing overcall. It's not necessary to give up 2nt for this sort of purpose.

I completely agree with the artificial puppet 2 NT overcall being a problem... If you have time I would actually appreciate your comments on the schemes outlined in post #5 and post #17 of this thread. They each revolve around overcaller using a passable 2NT and continuations by advancer that help ensure overcaller becomes the declarer.

Ultimately, I think I am in a hole here and should just stop digging.

[wclucas42]

Of course it is only after I post I catch my mistake again... It was in my statement "From what I understand, in this use case lebonsohl is used after the takeout double of a weak 2 bid by the responder." it should read "From what I understand, in this use case lebonsohl is used after the takeout double of a weak 2 bid by the _advancer_." I can see how this mistake would lead people to think I meant 2x - DBL - 2NT is invoking lebensohl puppet response when the actual sequence would be more like 2X - DBL - (P) - 2NT. Mea culpa, sorry I didn't catch that sooner. I can see how that could cause confusion.Again, stop digging...

[Vampyr]

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 19:26, said:

I currently play 2NT overcalls of weak 2s as showing a strong 1 NT (~15 - 17) opener with a stop. (See post #5 for my current scheme), your strength above is a fair bit less than mine, although three lines later you say "you can't bid 2nt anymore with 15/16-18 balanced." So are you suggesting ~10 - 11 w/ stops in opps suit or 15/16-18 w/o stops?

Neither. He suggested 16-18 with stoppers. This is normal.

[wclucas42]

Vampyr, on 2014-November-25, 20:07, said:

Neither. He suggested 16-18 with stoppers. This is normal.

Ok, good, that is what I am currently doing,

2 different ranges were provided in the post:

"...if you had a natural 2nt bid (~10-11 points or thereabouts with a heart stopper)..."

"- you can't bid 2nt anymore with 15/16-18 balanced. What will you do instead?"

and I couldn't tell if it was intentional or not. The two statements are far enough apart that I might have missed a subtlety which warranted the different ranges for the same bid.

Thanks,

[Vampyr]

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 20:46, said:

2 different ranges were provided in the post:

"...if you had a natural 2nt bid (~10-11 points or thereabouts with a heart stopper)..."

This was referring to advancer's problem after an artificial 2NT overcall.

[wclucas42]

Vampyr, on 2014-November-25, 20:51, said:

This was referring to advancer's problem after an artificial 2NT overcall.

So it is, Thanks.

I was confused by the reply at first, so I guess I misread it. I think we're on the same page for the most part. Stephen Tu's post might be a direct reply to post #19, makes total sense that way.

I started with a 2 NT natural overcall showing 15 - 17 w/ stops. I admit, I want a better agreement sitting in North... I want to be able to transfer and pass just like in a normal 1 NT auction. Stayman would be nice too.

A natural 2 NT overcall of a weak 2 should place no fewer than half the points in the deck. So I subtract my hand from 20ish and I can place RHO's points, sitting north I want to make sure I can land it in the right spot.

[Ace0Spades]

You have no promotable values in clubs or diamonds, just aces. Your spades have good filler cards. KJX is usually not as good as it seems. Often it goes small to the A and small back through the KJ with the Q on your left, but in fact either Q or A on your left means one heart stopper.

2S is correct.

[kgr]

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 10:51, said:

......
So these would be the possible Stayman auctions:
2♦ - 2NT - (P) - 3♣ (Stayman) - 3♥, 3♠ or 3NT (3♦ here could be pick your major with Smolen responses), extra strength would need to be shown at your next turn to bid.
2♥ - 2NT - (P) - 3♦ (Stayman) - 3♠, 3NT, 4♠, 3♥ super accept in spades
2♠ - 2NT - (P) - 3♥ (Stayman) - (Pass) minimum 4+ hearts, 3NT, 4♥, 3♠ super accept in hearts --This would be the only auction where the strong hand doesn't declare.
.....
As an aside, is there a better way to format sequences like the above so they are more readable. I looked through the pinned topics and the help section, but didn't find much. If there is a preferred format please provide a link.

I appreciate that you try to make your posts as readable as possible, therefore my suggestion on you questions.
You could use the hand editor, with only bidding selected; like:

---

- 3H=
- 3S=
...

Or you could use some more returns and I prefer bids by opps between brackets; like:
(2♥) - 2NT - (P) - 3♦ (Stayman)
(Pass)-?
- 3♠,
- 3NT, 4♠,
- 3♥ super accept in spades

Isn't there a generic post with formatting advise?

[kgr]

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 12:10, said:

kgr, on 2014-November-25, 09:28, said:

My first thought was 2NT. (Not sure if I'm good enough to make this count as a +1 for you ).
Note:
After (2H)-2NT we don't play the same system as after a 2NT opening because we don't want to play in H anymore.
3C is a puppet to 3D and can be weak with D or S, or some other strong hands.
Our bidding at IMPS would then be:
(2H)-2NT-3C-3D
or
(2H)-2NT-3NT

This also looks like the lebensohl 2NT, but lebonsohl is a lot more than a 2 NT bid.

So in your bidding would 2♥ - 2NT - 3♣ - 3♥ be Stayman with a heart stopper conversely would 2♥ - 3♥ be Stayman without a stopper? (this is where I started tanking) or do you just borrow the 2NT puppet bid?

From what I understand, in this use case lebonsohl is used after the takeout double of a weak 2 bid by the responder. I wasn't and am still not really certain it would work invoked for overcalls and advances.

Quickly applying lebonsohl:

overcalls of 2 of higher suit would still be natural and non-forcing

overcalls of 2NT puppets a 3 club (3 level continuations would work)

overcalls of 3 of a suit could still be game forcing

overcalls of 3 level cue bid, could still be Stayman w/o stopper (I don't know what advancer would do here with out stops in the opps suit and no 4 card major, is a new suit to play? How could he force? if short in opps suit, how could he show a long minor with slam interest? It's not like he can retreat to a previously bid suit so sign off and forces become problematic)

3NT makes me a little sick to my stomach, but transfers the problem nicely.

Being able to apply lebonsohl here has the advantage of one fewer gadget to memorize, but it seems like it will wrong side more contracts than 4 suit transfers... and as nekthen points out, I also lose the ability to pass in 2 NT as it is now a puppet bid.

Thanks for the responses, it's given me a lot to think about.

After a weak 2 by opps, we play 2NT natural (16-18 and good stops). So this is no Lebensohl 2NT.

(2M)-2NT
- 2NT: (15)16-18 and good stop

(2M)-2NT-(P)-?
- 3C=puppet to 3D
- 3D= 5c-oM, Inv+
- cue= GF, 4c-oM
- 3oM= slam try C
- 4X= natural slam try

(2M)-2NT-(P)-3C
(P)-3D-(P)-?
- cue= Both minors, 5-5
- 3oM= To play, weak
- 3NT= 6cD, singleton M
- 4C= 5-card D, 4-card C
- 4D= 6-card D, singleton C
- 4M= 6cD, singleton oM
- 4oM= Slam Force oM
- 4NT= quantitative, 5-card D

[mcphee]

I like 2N inspite of the 5 card S. Some days they lead H and score a ruff and my S are not so hot anyway. I have 2 aces which is good for NT and a useful S honor card will help develop that suit.

[bdegrande]

I would overcall 2♠with that hand, and with that diamond suit I would raise 2NT to 3NT. I will pay off to the rare case where there are exactly eight tricks.

[neilkaz]

mcphee, on 2014-November-26, 05:39, said:

I like 2N inspite of the 5 card S. Some days they lead H and score a ruff and my S are not so hot anyway. I have 2 aces which is good for NT and a useful S honor card will help develop that suit.

We agree. I also prefer 2N to 2♠.

[Stephen Tu]

wclucas42, on 2014-November-25, 20:46, said:

Ok, good, that is what I am currently doing,

2 different ranges were provided in the post:

"...if you had a natural 2nt bid (~10-11 points or thereabouts with a heart stopper)..."

"- you can't bid 2nt anymore with 15/16-18 balanced. What will you do instead?"

and I couldn't tell if it was intentional or not. The two statements are far enough apart that I might have missed a subtlety which warranted the different ranges for the same bid.

Thanks,

The natural 2nt bid = 10-11 was in reference to the situation after a 2♠ overcall, what does advancer do with this. (2♥)-2♠-(p)-?
It wasn't clear whether you were contemplating using 2nt artificially in this spot or not.

It looks like you were confused by kgr's suggestion of a fancy system over a natural 2nt overcall. He was suggesting a natural 2nt overcall, non-forcing, 16-18. After which responder can do anything. But with his system responder has the option of bidding 3♣ which forces 3♦, after which responder can pass with the hand in the original problem (probably best on average, though if advancer could peek and know overcaller has A♦ maybe 3nt is a better gamble on a heart lead).

But I think you read the (2H)-2nt-3c-3d sequence as the 2nt bid forcing 3 clubs, starting a Lebensohl like sequence, 2nt being a puppet to 3c. Whereas kgr meant 2nt as just natural, 3c was freely chosen response, puppet to 3d. 3c forced 3d here. 2nt didn't force 3c.

[wclucas42]

Stephen Tu, on 2014-November-26, 10:01, said:

The natural 2nt bid = 10-11 was in reference to the situation after a 2♠ overcall, what does advancer do with this. (2♥)-2♠-(p)-?
It wasn't clear whether you were contemplating using 2nt artificially in this spot or not.

It looks like you were confused by kgr's suggestion of a fancy system over a natural 2nt overcall. He was suggesting a natural 2nt overcall, non-forcing, 16-18. After which responder can do anything. But with his system responder has the option of bidding 3♣ which forces 3♦, after which responder can pass with the hand in the original problem (probably best on average, though if advancer could peek and know overcaller has A♦ maybe 3nt is a better gamble on a heart lead).

But I think you read the (2H)-2nt-3c-3d sequence as the 2nt bid forcing 3 clubs, starting a Lebensohl like sequence, 2nt being a puppet to 3c. Whereas kgr meant 2nt as just natural, 3c was freely chosen response, puppet to 3d. 3c forced 3d here. 2nt didn't force 3c.

I did miss read kgrs 3C puppet bid initially and he was nice enough to provide the rest of the system notes for the bid... I agree its pretty fancy, more complicated than anything I would have come up with... It's actually those type of continuation schemes that I am most interested, because right now natural response don't seem to be sufficient.


Thanks again for the comments and trying to steer me out of disaster, unfortunately, its probably not going to be the only time.