[billw55]

About the opponents hands. Suggestions above for overcaller include:

♠AJxx ♥A ♦AKxxxx ♣xx
♠AQxx ♥xx ♦AKxxxxx ♣--

I would have considered both of these as double and pull if needed. If they were polled, I would have expected comments to include a lot of "don't want to lose spades".

Also for righty:

♠KTxxx ♥Axx ♦x ♣xxxx

... with which I would not pass, rather make a nonforcing 1♠ advance.

Thoughts?

[mikeh]

Traditionally, at least in NA, the teaching was that a simple overcall would be limited in high card strength. Even today I see inexperienced or bad players write on their convention card things like overcalls show 8-15.

More recently, and by that I mean over the last 30 plus years, it has become widely accepted by many strong players that a double should promise at least some support for unbid suits OR be a very, very strong playing hand...whether in notrump or one's own suit.

Kokish became the best known promoter of these approach, probably because of his relationship with the Bridge World, and assisted, obviously, by his status as arguably the best bridge coach of our times, and one of the leading theorists.

I think AJxx A AKxxxx xx is a close decision. For me, the answer starts with thinking about how I would feel if the auction were to go, for example, [1♣] x [3♣] 4♥.

I'd be distinctly uncomfortable here, since I have no reason to assume that partner has 6+ hearts. I also have no reason to assume that 5♦ will be a playable spot.

Arguments such as not wanting to lose the spade suit don't resonate with me. While the OP hand does suggest that we may in fact be losing the heart suit should opener pass us out, a lot of players are bidding hearts here! And opener WILL be reopening on a lot of hands....wouldn't we all reopen with 3=4=1=5 13 counts?

It is rare in today's game to be passed out at the 1-level and while that can (and would here with many of us) happen, that is merely a risk factor to be balanced against what happens if it is partner who tries to insist on hearts in a competitive auction.

I am prepared to bid spades at virtually all levels...I'd be thinking if the opps blast to 4♥ before I get a second turn, but that has to be wildly unlikely....if LHO makes a weak jump shift and gets raised, I might do it and would definitely do it at imps.

However, on the first hand you reference, I think it to be close and wouldn't criticize a double as 'wrong'.

The second hand...yes, in my view a double on AQxx xx AKxxxxx void is wrong. There is virtually no risk that this hand is being passed in 1♦ and what risk there is will often be associated with our not having any better place to play. It would be an unusual parlay for no other player bidding over our 1♦ overcall AND the hand belonging to us at the game level.

As with virtually all bridge bidding decisions, it is a basic error to focus exclusively on how our actions might work or, from the other perspective, on how they might go wrong. It is essential to recognize both aspects of any decision, and to balance them against a similar analysis for alternative actions, including understanding how partner is likely to interpret our actions (since he isn't looking at our hand).

We see this problem, of focussing too narrowly on issues, all the time, most commonly with people who want to open 2♣ on inappropriate hands.

[PhantomSac]

billw55, on 2015-February-27, 13:03, said:

About the opponents hands. Suggestions above for overcaller include:

♠AJxx ♥A ♦AKxxxx ♣xx
♠AQxx ♥xx ♦AKxxxxx ♣--

I would have considered both of these as double and pull if needed. If they were polled, I would have expected comments to include a lot of "don't want to lose spades".

Also for righty:

♠KTxxx ♥Axx ♦x ♣xxxx

... with which I would not pass, rather make a nonforcing 1♠ advance.

Thoughts?

Bidding 1D with AQxx xx AKxxxxx --- is totally normal, it will almost never go 1D AP. Doubling and bidding with a 13 count is often not going to end well.

I think bidding 1S with KTxxx Axx x xxxx as a passed hand is normal, I would never consider passing esp white as a passed hand.

You would probably find some support for Xing with AJxx A AKxxxx xx but doubling with underweight HCP hands and a stiff in a major is very dangerous, if partner bids a lot of hearts you have to go back to diamonds which could find you too high or overbidding your hand etc. I think most people would bid 1D, if the auction stays alive (which it is likely to) you will be well placed to double or bid spades later.

[billw55]

This is my new favorite bridge thread.

[PhantomSac]

Sry I crossposted with mike on my last post...coulda just said I agree with him.

Bill if you are bidding 1H because you think your hand is good enough to justify it (ie, it might still be your hand even when partner has spades and was not strong enough to bid 1S or X 1D), I think that is a reasonable view. Our hand is pretty good and partner could have some 5233 4 count where it is our hand for instance. But I think you should back away from your approach of bidding since you don't want them to play 1m at MP.

With this shape for instance you should basically almost always pass unless you have 17+ at least. And that applies to most hands that have 3 or 4 diamonds, you need significant values to balance. The same goes for something like 1444 if it goes 1x (where x is not spades) p p and you are w/r, you would need a lot of values to consider bidding because your partner didn't overcall 1S or make a takeout X so either the opps have spades or your partner doesn't have much values/has length in their suit (in which case you will do well defending as you have more trumps than them). Balancing too much just because is a common thing but it is not good. I also think people balance too much with Hx in LHOs suit but that is a different story.

[billw55]

I also considered that partner could have middling values, but no call because he has diamonds. Maybe something like Kxx xxx Kxxx xxx, where (I would think) bidding 1NT freely suggests more like 8-10. This would give the opponents more spades .. but us more high cards. Admittedly though my own ♦QJx makes this scenario less likely.

[P_Marlowe]

1H

[PhantomSac]

billw55, on 2015-February-27, 13:55, said:

I also considered that partner could have middling values, but no call because he has diamonds. Maybe something like Kxx xxx Kxxx xxx, where (I would think) bidding 1NT freely suggests more like 8-10. This would give the opponents more spades .. but us more high cards. Admittedly though my own ♦QJx makes this scenario less likely.

Absolutely this kind of hand is possible, but the opponents are going to do quite well in spades and probably not so well in diamonds when partner has this hand type. They can ruff diamonds to dummy etc, best case we probably get 2 clubs 1 heart and 1 spade so they can make 3S.

Bidding 1H will probably hurt us more than it will help us in this scenario. Bidding 1N might work, but partner will bid at least 2N and if they lead a spade we won't make, if they lead a diamond we might not even make (or we might). But 1N has other dangers, for instance partner might bid 2S if he has 5 spades.

Even given this scenario it's not clear that passing will not be best, and it will very likely be better than 1H. QJx of diamonds is really a bad holding.

[eagles123]

mgoetze, on 2015-February-27, 08:09, said:

I think you meant to ask "1♥ or 2♥?", right?

no

[helene_t]

mikeh, on 2015-February-27, 11:20, said:

There is no point being better than the field if all we are trying to do is to go with the field.

The "go with the field" argument comes up quite regularly and is sometimes used as an explanation for the phenomena that most experts play fairly mainstream methods.

I apply it myself when I am at 59% after board 11 in robot rebate and just need to avoid a bottom on board 12. But that is a very artificial situation.

Usually we are not very risk-adverse. We don't really know if we need a swing or if we need to avoid a swing.

Then there is the argument that we should aim at playing the same 3nt contract that everyone else plays and make an overtrick which the rest of the field misses. But maybe most of the field gets an undeserved overtrick due do a defense mistake so in that case we would have to bid a better contract to avoid a poor score. We simply don't know what the field does. So don't worry about it.

[GrahamJson]

I don't play much on BBO largely because my Wifi isn't very reliable. When I do, I seem to score pretty well by bidding rather less than others. My main observation from watching on BBO is that most players get too busy and bid (and double and redouble) too much.

This problem is tricky. I wouldn't criticize 1H, which could work out well, but I think pass is the percentage call. If you have a decent partner he will try hard to scrape up a bid over 1D, particularly if holding spades, so he rates to have a very poor hand.

[daffydoc]

Arguments that opp may have a spade game or even slam are interesting and certainly possible - but not bidding here does not sit well when I clearly have the best hand at the table - if they fit spades we fit hearts or clubs and will be willing to push them to the 3 level at MP. daffydoc

[case_no_6]

I pass. Partner had a chance to bid 1S or Dbl over 1D and partner likely has 3 or 4 spades. If partner had anything of value and 4 hearts, Dbl would have been easy, so the chances of a heart fit seem very meager. What's more the chances of the opponents having a spade fit seem pretty substantial - partner won't often have 5 spades on this auction. I think they have an 8 card spade fit most days with at least half the deck. It seems like a good MP result to let them take their tricks at 20 points apiece in diamonds instead of 30 playing in spades.

Megan
BBO name: Case_No_6

[Trump Echo]

P_Marlowe, on 2015-February-27, 14:08, said:

1H

Yes.

[eagles123]

and the result is... 6s is cold for NS - their hands are

---

Cheers,

Eagles

[cherdano]

helene_t, on 2015-February-27, 17:51, said:

I apply it myself when I am at 59% after board 11 in robot rebate and just need to avoid a bottom on board 12. But that is a very artificial situation.

Except I have never figured out what the field does in a robot rebate. Sometimes it's opening 1NT (15-17) on a completely normal 14 or 18 count. On another day, that's a high-risk gamble.

[gszes]

I am probably as anti field as one can imagine and here it seems tactically sound to back in with 1n. I am not that happy with backing in with 1h mainly because of the soft values in diamonds which are all too easily ruffed away. It is almost impossible for p to have a hand where they failed to bid over 1d and yet feel compelled to bid 2s. The 1n bid also may make life much tougher for the opps to find any spade fit they have. Very difficult for the opps to find a successful x of 1n and we rate to score 6 tricks opposite an unlikely zip which will beat a lot of positive scores the opps might make. If my partner has used up their daily supply of antiacid I can find a pass.

[PhilKing]

eagles123, on 2015-March-01, 04:18, said:

and the result is... 6s is cold for NS - their hands are

---

Cheers,

Eagles

Looks like the bidders were right - surely the oppo will now bid to Seven one down.