[MrAce]

 rhm, on 2017-June-30, 04:07, said:

I would not throw this sequence ((1♦)-X-(P)-1N-(P)-2♥) at partner without discussion, but I beg to differ.
Even playing standard I do not understand why so many insist bidding 2♥ here needs to be reserved for hands too strong to overcall immediately.
My guess is the reason is lazy thinking.
Playing equal level conversion anyway this is a clear flannery type sequence (could be 6♥-4♠).
What the matter is wrong with bidding 3♥ over 1N to show a powerhouse, assuming a 1N in response to a takeout dbl shows some values.
It is not like takeout doubler has any problem differentiating strong hands with a heart suit.
Are 3♥,4♥ or 2♦ followed by hearts not enough to differentiate between very strong heart hands, which occur every other leap year anyway while the flannery hand type is quite common?

The risk of missing a spade fit (or a club fit) by overcalling 1♥ (LHO might preempt next) is far more likely than missing a good heart fit by starting with a double.
Sometimes we will have a fit in both majors, in which case playing spades will often be preferable, due to ruffing diamonds with the "short" trump side can provide extra tricks.
When we overcall 1♥ partner will not look fro a spade fit when he has heart support, say 5♠-3♥s.

Rainer Herrmann

You are conveniently skipping the most important point which is the fact that you have no clue whatsoever how the auction will proceed.
Say you have 6-4 or any minimum Flannery hand that you decided to start DBL but the auction goes a little different than your example, such as

(1♦) - X- (2♦) -3♣

Now you are stunned. You can try pass and play ypur club fit when 6-2 or even 6-3 major fit was available at MP.
At imps it's another issue because had you known there is a fit in major you could have a shot at game. If you decide to act over 3♣ that opens a whole new cans of worms, which may work occasionally and does not work well in other hands.
So yes, if you had a talent to know how the auction will proceed, then starting dbl with Flannery hands including 6-4 majors makes more sense. Otherwise I am failing to see the need for starting dbl.

I am not even mentioning the fact that allowing pd know your main suit before you dbl also allows him to make smarter evaluation of his hand when you find a fit in another suit.
I admit not starting dbl has its own drawbacks. Basically none of these 2 styles are cost free as some people try to show them.

[MrAce]

 nige1, on 2017-June-24, 17:51, said:

I rank

• 1♥ = NAT. IMO, bidding ♥s and then doubling exaggerates the quality of the [HE[ suit and the strength of the hand.

Correct your knowledge about starting with a simple overcall followed by DBL.
It never promises or tells anything about the overcall suit quality. It is all about other places to play and willing to compete. Nothing less nothing more at the point double is made.
Overcall followed by double followed by rebidding your overcall suit is another story.

For example you overcall1 ♠ with

JTxxxx AKx x AQJ

and the auction goes

(1♦) - 1♠ - (2♦)- pass
pass -

You have to double and that has nothing to do with spade quality.

[rhm]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-30, 05:02, said:

You are conveniently skipping the most important point which is the fact that you have no clue whatsoever how the auction will proceed.
Say you have 6-4 or any minimum Flannery hand that you decided to start DBL but the auction goes a little different than your example, such as

(1♦) - X- (2♦) -3♣

Now you are stunned. You can try pass and play ypur club fit when 6-2 or even 6-3 major fit was available at MP.
At imps it's another issue because had you known there is a fit in major you could have a shot at game. If you decide to act over 3♣ that opens a whole new cans of worms, which may work occasionally and does not work well in other hands.
So yes, if you had a talent to know how the auction will proceed, then starting dbl with Flannery hands including 6-4 majors makes more sense. Otherwise I am failing to see the need for starting dbl.

I am not even mentioning the fact that allowing pd know your main suit before you dbl also allows him to make smarter evaluation of his hand when you find a fit in another suit.

I mentioned I like equal level conversion only as a side remark, believing its advantages outweigh its disadvantages.
But I readily admit there are scenarios, which could be problematic. Responder has to be careful when responding in the lowest unbid suit (a minor) at a high level, since takeout doubler does not necessarily guarantee support.
But the current 4♠-5♥-1♦-3♣ hand has little to do with equal level conversion since we do have club support.

Nobody can predict how an auction will develop.
However, I sincerely are convinced that starting with a double in this case is more likely to give us far less headaches than starting with a 1♥ overcall.
If you would ask what to do with this hand over a 3♦ preempt you would find very few experts preferring 3♥ to a takeout double. (If you pass with the actual hand over 3♦ (fair enough) make it a little stronger).
So it sounds to me strange claiming that a 1♥ overcall would leave you overall better placed to manage the subsequent auction when LHO might just about raise diamonds to any level.
Overcalling 1♥ puts all your eggs in one basket. Fine if your fit is in hearts.
Of course double could let us miss a 5-3 fit in hearts. Otherwise this would not be contentious at all, but I see no good reason why a takeout double followed by a 2♥ bid over a 1NT response has to be played as super-strong.

Reverse the major suit lengths (5♠-4♥) and I am with the overcallers, but this is of course very different.
When I overcall in hearts and subsequently double a dimaond raise I am unlikely to hold 4 cards in spades and partner should take this into account. .
M typical distribution would be more likely 3♠-6♥-1♦-3♣

Rainer Herrmann

[MrAce]

 rhm, on 2017-June-30, 05:21, said:

So it sounds to me strange claiming that a 1♥ overcall would leave you overall better placed to manage the subsequent auction.

Rainer Herrmann

Yes I believe strongly that starting overcall especially with 6-4 M hands is the winner. I would not bet my money on the hand in OP dbl vs overcall as I would with 6-4 hands though.
When it is not our pd but LHO who bids, and he acts before our pd, my all 5-3 ♥ fit are gone bye bye if I start dbl. To my experience it is much more frequent to lose those fits compared to my options later and failing to miss other fits.

OTOH, if we end up defending, especially a NT contract, starting dbl will allow my pd to make smarter leads, I am aware of this. But starting dbl will also reveal your shape more than needed for declarer in some other hands.

[Winstonm]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-25, 08:32, said:

No, 1 ♥ has the flexibility to make another call later such as DBL. Starting DBL does not.

How does your partner know if you are balancing with an 11-count or actually have additional values? I am not being critical but am curious how you think a partner with a hand such as KJxxxx, Kx, xx, xxx should bid in an auction that starts: 1D-1H-3D*-?

For me, it is a pass, but when partner reopens with a double I can confidently bid 4S. This is a losing style when both sides can make a partscore, I realize. So I was only wondering how this problem is being dealt with these days or if it is even considered a problem.

[MrAce]

 Winstonm, on 2017-June-30, 15:04, said:

How does your partner know if you are balancing with an 11-count or actually have additional values? I am not being critical but am curious how you think a partner with a hand such as KJxxxx, Kx, xx, xxx should bid in an auction that starts: 1D-1H-3D*-?

For me, it is a pass, but when partner reopens with a double I can confidently bid 4S. This is a losing style when both sides can make a partscore, I realize. So I was only wondering how this problem is being dealt with these days or if it is even considered a problem.

The hand you gave can try 4♠. I would be much more confident bidding 4 had my diamonds been xxx instead of club suit in your example. But you are placing pd with a 6 card suit and Kx in main suit of overcaller. I think 4 ♠ is very reasonable shot. 3 ♦ is cold at least. Make the spades 5 card and I would always bid 3♠. No need to punish pd for guessing we can have a good spot to play at 3 level. Add something else and the hand you gave can easily double 3♦.

Now change the pd's hand to Kxx xxxx xxx KTx and you would suffer for starting double. He would pass and you need to double again which begs the same question you asked. How will your pd know whether you started double with 11 hcp and doubled again with 11 hcp or whether you have extras or not. Had you started 1♥, his hand improves by like 4 times! xxx in the suit you are expected to be short and a 5-4 or 6-4 ♥ fit + 2 side kings!

[Winstonm]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-30, 16:30, said:

The hand you gave can try 4♠. I would be much more confident bidding 4 had my diamonds been xxx instead of club suit in your example. But you are placing pd with a 6 card suit and Kx in main suit of overcaller. I think 4 ♠ is very reasonable shot. 3 ♦ is cold at least. Make the spades 5 card and I would always bid 3♠. No need to punish pd for guessing we can have a good spot to play at 3 level. Add something else and the hand you gave can easily double 3♦.

Now change the pd's hand to Kxx xxxx xxx KTx and you would suffer for starting double. He would pass and you need to double again which begs the same question you asked. How will your pd know whether you started double with 11 hcp and doubled again with 11 hcp or whether you have extras or not. Had you started 1♥, his hand improves by like 4 times! xxx in the suit you are expected to be short and a 5-4 or 6-4 ♥ fit + 2 side kings!

No amount of justification can alter the facts that bidding a suit and then doubling with both 11-counts and 16+-counts has to create an insoluble problem for partner, which is not necessarily wrong or a bad thing because it allows more competition with weaker hands. But I think it is important to understand the give-ups one has to live with when adopting that style.

[MrAce]

 Winstonm, on 2017-June-30, 20:41, said:

No amount of justification can alter the facts that bidding a suit and then doubling with both 11-counts and 16+-counts has to create an insoluble problem for partner, which is not necessarily wrong or a bad thing because it allows more competition with weaker hands. But I think it is important to understand the give-ups one has to live with when adopting that style.

What are you even talking about when say 16+ ? Overcall is already limited to 17 for most people.
And pd knows you are 11 ish, with 16+ and perfect take out shape you would start dbl and then dbl again.

[Cyberyeti]

 Winstonm, on 2017-June-30, 20:41, said:

No amount of justification can alter the facts that bidding a suit and then doubling with both 11-counts and 16+-counts has to create an insoluble problem for partner, which is not necessarily wrong or a bad thing because it allows more competition with weaker hands. But I think it is important to understand the give-ups one has to live with when adopting that style.

We do this, and it really isn't too much of a problem, our simple overcalls are pretty sound at the lower end but go up to much better than most peoples'.

[mcphee]

When you over call you are basically suggesting a competitive hand over a wide range of values, a lead suggestion. To me this H suit is not suitable especially looking at 4S. Double to me is clearly more in line with my hand.

[Winstonm]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-30, 23:45, said:

What are you even talking about when say 16+ ? Overcall is already limited to 17 for most people.
And pd knows you are 11 ish, with 16+ and perfect take out shape you would start dbl and then dbl again.

If you don't like my numbers, pick a range. Surely there is a hand too weak for that action. If so, there is your bottom. If you always double first with 17, there is your top. But the issue is how big of spread lies between the low end and high end of overcall and then double back in.

When you have a wide spread of strength, using the same bid to describe both makes partner have to guess which hand you have. Do you dispute that? When you reserve bid and double back in for the upper end of your overcall range, you give up some chances to compete with lesser hands? Is there any argument there?

I'm not arguing that one style is superior to the other. But I do argue that their are drawbacks to both.

[aguahombre]

I never understood the idea that a consideration when making a direct overcall should be its lead-directing effect. If we don't buy the contract, I will most likely be the one on lead; and, if my LHO bids NT Partner will have a clue.

In the context here -- double vs overcall -- it is even less likely that Partner will be on lead against a Spade or Club contract.

[NickRW]

IMO 1♥, then re-enter with X if needed