[Wackojack]

So far no one has speculated on what South’s bid of 3♣ could mean. Normally I think it should mean “Have you got a stop in clubs for 3NT?â€� But does it mean this here?

This is how I see things:

South did not overcall 1NT, so at that stage could be:
(i) balanced 8-14 lead directing
(ii) balanced 15-17 with no club stop and 5 or 6 diamonds
(iii) unbalanced 8-17.
The points given are inevitably approximate.

North cues 2♣ which would normally shows at least 3 card club support and about 11+ (good 10?)
.
Then South with:

(i) would bid 2♦ with 8-11. With a club stop and a good 12 or 13 might try 2NT or 3NT with 14. With no club stop South might try 3♣ with a good 13 or 14. So asking for a club stop.

(ii) would bid 3♣ asking for a club stop

(iii) would bid 2♦ with 8-11 and 5 cards, probably 3♦ with 6 cards. With 12-17 and a singleton major would bid 2 in the other major.
A singleton club is not possible unless having a distribution like 3-3-6-1 but again 3♣ here would be asking for a club stop.

So we have to conclude that 3♣ has to be asking for a club stop. So North with a balanced 12 must do as he is told and bid 3♦.

[wank]

BillPatch, on 2015-August-15, 09:01, said:

Assuming that you have another way to express a strong ♠ hand, most traditional systems don't, at least among English speaking
world.

1 spade if it's forcing. for me it would be 2 spades as i play 1 spade as non-forcing as i overcall on qtxxx and out (not vul against not admittedly).

[BillPatch]

North's 2♣ cue is normally a LR in diamonds, which he would normally express with the minimal diamond rebid. If he had some other type of hand which required a cue bid force he would not be following South's orders at this point. The 3♦ rebid now makes South boss/captain.

[Jinksy]

I'll come out as S in this auction now. I don't claim that I bid this well, but I don't agree with some of what has been said.

Firstly, I still hate a direct 1N overcall with Ax in their suit. 5cMs or no, the expected min length of whichever opps' club suit is the longest is surely close to 5 (if not greater) here. If so I do not want to be in game opposite P's random 9 count, since I strongly doubt we'll have 8 cashing tricks elsewhere. My feeling was 1♦ ~= X > 1N.

Secondly, everyone seems convinced N's UCB shows a solid 10+ points. For a bid that only pushed us to the 2 level, that seems like very inefficient partitioning, given that even at these colours P will likely raise on something close to a suitable Yarborough. No less than Andrew Robson recently wrote a column claiming that at MPs, UCBs should be about 8+ as standard since (IIRC) once P's shown values it makes it easier to X them if they over-compete, and makes it commensurately less likely that they'll compete in the first place. (I've seen a number of people here complain about the overly strict requirements for Drury, and that's in a constructive auction where P's lower bound is already higher the Drury bid's lower bound is lower, and it otherwise seems analogous)

Thirdly - in part because of the previous point, but however much strength we're supposed to have between us - 3♦ didn't look to me like a forcing bid. If P wanted to probe for 3N, I reasoned, he could have bid 3M. The odds of us wanting to pursue a diamond slam esp at this scoring seem remote (and there are plenty of other ways of doing it), so 3♦ looks like a 'I have nothing more to say' bid. Expecting no help in clubs and no substantial extras opposite, I didn't think 3N's prospects seemed any brighter than when I was considering my first call. I felt (and still feel) that with 2-4 points to spare (depending on whether you accept the previous point), N should have bid his major stops, over which I'd intended to rebid 3N, admitting to a weak C stop.

I can be persuaded out of any of this but asserting that '3♣ sets up a gameforce' isn't enough.

[kenberg]

I was glad to see you address the use of 2C on 8+ since that may have a lot to do with the rest.

I just wouldn't use it that way, I don't raise the 1D overcall to 2D without some values. Maybe a 6 count with a doubleton somewhere. It is just different. This is one of those things that I cannot imagine myseff changing my mind about. It doesn't mean that I am right, I just won't be changing my mind.

I'm trying to see things in this different light, as to how I would then act after the 3C and 3D bids. Your partner certainly has more than an 8 count. On the other hand, he has a worthless doubleton in clubs so unless your 3C showed or club stop, I don't see him trying for 3NT. And he envisions losing the first two tricks in clubs with diamonds as trumps, so 5D doesn't look good (and isn't good). So I guess 3D seemed best.

But I accept that my thoughts are not apt to be of much use since raising 1D to 2D on nothing, and bidding 2C on an 8 count, is just not at all my approach so it is hard for me to think in these terms.

I said earlier that if the 2C could be on an 8 count then, over 2C, I would have bid 2Nt. I still would. I think 1NT originally is better, but having not done so I would bid 2NT now, rather than 3C. Unless I have had a lengthy discussion with my partner as to what to expect from my 3C bid. I expect him to understand a 2NT bid.

[MrAce]

Jinksy, on 2015-August-15, 18:17, said:

I'll come out as S in this auction now. I don't claim that I bid this well, but I don't agree with some of what has been said.

Firstly, I still hate a direct 1N overcall with Ax in their suit. 5cMs or no, the expected min length of whichever opps' club suit is the longest is surely close to 5 (if not greater) here. If so I do not want to be in game opposite P's random 9 count, since I strongly doubt we'll have 8 cashing tricks elsewhere. My feeling was 1♦ ~= X > 1N.

Here is a comment I really liked for the same hand in BW. by Yuan shen

http://bridgewinners...g-problem-8968/

[mike777]

Wackojack, on 2015-August-15, 09:02, said:

So far no one has speculated on what South’s bid of 3♣ could mean. Normally I think it should mean “Have you got a stop in clubs for 3NT?” But does it mean this here?

This is how I see things:

South did not overcall 1NT, so at that stage could be:
(i) balanced 8-14 lead directing
(ii) balanced 15-17 with no club stop and 5 or 6 diamonds
(iii) unbalanced 8-17.
The points given are inevitably approximate.

North cues 2♣ which would normally shows at least 3 card club support and about 11+ (good 10?)
.
Then South with:

(i) would bid 2♦ with 8-11. With a club stop and a good 12 or 13 might try 2NT or 3NT with 14. With no club stop South might try 3♣ with a good 13 or 14. So asking for a club stop.

(ii) would bid 3♣ asking for a club stop

(iii) would bid 2♦ with 8-11 and 5 cards, probably 3♦ with 6 cards. With 12-17 and a singleton major would bid 2 in the other major.
A singleton club is not possible unless having a distribution like 3-3-6-1 but again 3♣ here would be asking for a club stop.

So we have to conclude that 3♣ has to be asking for a club stop. So North with a balanced 12 must do as he is told and bid 3♦.

actually see my post...I discussed 3c....extras and gf.

if new suit by responder is only constructive and nf then 2c does not 100% promise support...it is your only F1, granted most common is inv+ and support.

to play 2c as only 8 and d support is too weird.

[wank]

Jinksy, on 2015-August-15, 18:17, said:

P will likely raise on something close to a suitable Yarborough.

why would he want to do that? a simple raise should be something like 5 or 6 to 9

[Zelandakh]

Jinksy, on 2015-August-15, 18:17, said:

Secondly, everyone seems convinced N's UCB shows a solid 10+ points. For a bid that only pushed us to the 2 level, that seems like very inefficient partitioning, given that even at these colours P will likely raise on something close to a suitable Yarborough. No less than Andrew Robson recently wrote a column claiming that at MPs, UCBs should be about 8+ as standard since (IIRC) once P's shown values it makes it easier to X them if they over-compete, and makes it commensurately less likely that they'll compete in the first place. (I've seen a number of people here complain about the overly strict requirements for Drury, and that's in a constructive auction where P's lower bound is already higher the Drury bid's lower bound is lower, and it otherwise seems analogous)

Was AR talking specifically about minor suit UCBs with this statement? What he writes is perfectly correct for major suit overcalls, and your reference to Drury is naturally also for the majors, but with a minor our constructive auctions are aiming primarily for 3NT and so the hcp part is correspondingly more important.

[kenberg]

MrAce, on 2015-August-15, 19:53, said:

Here is a comment I really liked for the same hand in BW. by Yuan shen

http://bridgewinners...g-problem-8968/

Thanks for the reference. I took pleasure in seeing, since it also occurred to me above, him not that if I overcall 1NT then I will be happy when/if partner transfers.

Of course he may not have five cards in a major, but he may. If he doesn't, the chances are decent that he holds some cards in the minors. Maybe some clubs. Or maybe not.

I said that I was not bothered by the club situation, and Shen speaks to this. Of course if partner holds Qx in clubs I would rather that he play it. But if he holds Qxx it may not matter much. If I have to give up a trick to establish my tricks. it is likely that I can arrange to give that trick to my rho. So I win the club, give him a trick, clubs are stopped.

Nothing is certain, if it were we would not need the forums, but I still favor the NT overcall.



Added: In this hand, partner does not have a five card major and he does not have Qxx in clubs. 1NT still works out fine.


Of course if partner has Jxx in clubs I would like him to play it. Also if NT is going down I would like him to play it.

[wank]

I hate overcalling NT on a doubleton in their suit even when it's a potentially not very long club. If we belong in NT it's either better from partner's hand or, as per this hand, partner has a good hand and we'll get to 3nt by our hand anyway.

[BillPatch]

I agree with Z, minor suit overcalls with severely limited Unassuming Cue Bids seem to make bidding stronger responding hands awkward. Over a major overcall 2NT is available for the stronger raises, which frees the jump cue and jump raises for weaker unbalanced hands. The lowest bid available over a minor overcall under Jinksey's methods for a LR is a jump cue bid. For the three level to be playable a one diamond overcall must be approximately a full opener, and two level overcall's a K higher. While I am from non-acol ACBL land, I doubt these methods are suitable in any flavor of acol. Even with the methods I am familiar with I greatly prefer double or one NT over the minor suit overcall for the ease in finding 5-3 major fits. Bird in his new work on matchpoints notes that that scoring tends to favor NT over 5-3 major fits, but with only a single stopper in opener's suit and its high card points in control cards the double is slightly superior 1NT because this hand screams suit play. Because it discourages major suit exploration and I am unsure how the system works after the 1♦ overcall, it is a weak third choice.

[iandayre]

South had other options at every turn. No action he could take at any point would please everyone. I don't strongly fault any of them.

Only 3D was a disastrous blunder. N knows the quality of his trump support. Keep the shape the same and move the DK to H, and no game is good. N must bid 3S over 3C, assuming a sensible system where a 2S advance on the first round is natural and strong. Or 1S forcing, not a treatment I prefer but reasonable.

[1eyedjack]

Misunderestimated = overestimated, right? So no blame

[WellSpyder]

Jinksy, on 2015-August-14, 13:30, said:

very few agreements.

Jinksy, on 2015-August-15, 18:17, said:

I can be persuaded out of any of this but asserting that '3♣ sets up a gameforce' isn't enough.

I think you are over-thinking this by worrying that N could have an 8-count. If you have very few agreements, a UCB to me would at least say "if you have a sound overcall I think we ought to have a chance of making game", and the 3♣ bid would say "yes, I have a sound overcall". Even if nothing else about what these bids are trying to convey is clear, I think you can still expect subsequent bidding to be about finding the right game, not about deciding whether or not to stop in a partscore.

[1eyedjack]

WellSpyder, on 2015-August-18, 03:23, said:

If you have very few agreements, a UCB to me would at least say "if you have a sound overcall I think we ought to have a chance of making game", and the 3♣ bid would say "yes, I have a sound overcall".

One of the benefits of showing some values might be assist in judging the partscore battle: When to give up the fight for the partscore and whether to double when the opponents overreach. At MP in particular finding the thin doubles has elevated importance.
Furthermore, if your one-suit overcalls are sufficiently wide range, you might wish to show interest in game opposite a hand that is not simply "sound" but perhaps "very sound". In other words, if the overcall is very wide range, then a "sound" overcall remains pretty wide ranging.

There will be hands when an agreement for an 8+ UCB will gain. I tend to agree that where your suit is a minor this is a long term loser, but it is not that obvious.

[WellSpyder]

1eyedjack, on 2015-August-18, 04:02, said:

One of the benefits of showing some values might be assist in judging the partscore battle: When to give up the fight for the partscore and whether to double when the opponents overreach. At MP in particular finding the thin doubles has elevated importance.
Furthermore, if your one-suit overcalls are sufficiently wide range, you might wish to show interest in game opposite a hand that is not simply "sound" but perhaps "very sound". In other words, if the overcall is very wide range, then a "sound" overcall remains pretty wide ranging.

There will be hands when an agreement for an 8+ UCB will gain. I tend to agree that where your suit is a minor this is a long term loser, but it is not that obvious.

I don't disagree with you in a practised partnership, but with few agreements I think a healthy dose of "Keep It Simple, Stupid" goes a long way.

[BillPatch]

1eyedjack, on 2015-August-18, 00:40, said:

Misunderestimated = overestimated, right? So no blame

The relevant definition of Misunderestimated here seems to be messed up because they underestimated. I do not know if it's a real word, so would probably challenge it at Scrabble.

[BillPatch]

A UCB with 8 hcp makes some sense opposite an opening bid which promises either extra HCP or extra distribution over the WNT opening bid. An overcall does not promise as much; so the UCB must have at least LR strength, enough to raise the strong NT rebid to 3NT, stoppers permitting.

[KurtGodel]

rmnka447, on 2015-August-14, 13:54, said:

South gets the big share of the blame. I marked other because I think South missed the boat twice in the auction.

First, South has 15 HCP, a balanced hand, and a ♣ stopper. What's wrong with a simple 1 NT overcall unless you're playing that as something unusual?

Second, a cue of opener's suit by North shows at least 11+ value minimum and is unlimited. It's the normal way to show a game invitational or better hand opposite a TO double. Without that much, advancer simply makes a suit bid in 4+ card suit -- 1 of a suit 0-7, 2 of a suit 8-10 value.

After 3 ♣, North bids 3 ♦ simply showing something in ♦ to go along at least invitational values. With stoppers in the other suits and a big ♦ fit, South has an easy 3 NT bid at MPs.

Bidding 1NT with the south cards is ridiculous, you don't have a very good club stop, and you certainly don't have a very positional one. Apart from that you have a very 'suity' hand (full of aces and kings). Secondly, the cue definitely is not 11+, it would be perfectly appropriate to bid 2♣ with KJxx xxxx KQxx x. South didn't make a takeout double either...