Your bid
#23
Posted 2006-October-27, 04:37
Scoring: MP
The full deal
N E S W
p 1♥ p p
1♠ 2♥ dble p
p p
My partner doubled which I left in for - 870. I find it difficult in these situations not to be a result merchant, but I think I would have bid 2♠ with partner's hand.
Interesting that a "bad" 2♣ overcall would have paid off well.
Don't anybody ask why West passed the 1♥ opening.
May 2003: Mission accomplished
Oct 2006: Mission impossible
Soon: Mission illegal
Oct 2006: Mission impossible
Soon: Mission illegal
#24
Posted 2006-October-27, 08:16
Hi everyone
You balanced with 1S and 'after' they rebid their suit, partner doubled for 'penalty' and you left it in with the stiff Q of trump 'plus' AKJx in an unbid suit. Perhaps partners double was more than a little shaky if his values produce minus 870 when the opponents 'rebid' suit was still very minimum?
2S raise is a really fine idea 'opposite' a passed partner. You might be short a trump(Qx plays for no losers sometimes opposite AKxxx while AKxxx opposite xxx
never plays for zero losers), however, you do have extra values and you do have an idea that a penalty would be unlikely to gain.
It is not a really bad idea to pass a ten loser hand opposite a 1H opening with xxx of trumps.
I like to play almost all low(and many high) level doubles as value showing.
I seem to get more penalties 'showing' values rather than 'got them' partner type doubles. The partner with the shortness doubles and the partner with the trump stack passes. Without a trump stack, you bid higher 'at low levels.'
Overcalling bad hands with bad suits at the two level 'sometimes' works and sometimes goes for minus a zillion. Exchange the North and West hands and see how your 2C overcall does. You lose maybe a spade, two hearts, 4 clubs and a diamond. Result merchant?
With values North will balance and 'if' the North and West hands were exchanged,
The auction will go p-1H-p(!)-1S-p-2H instead of you overcalling 2Cs and getting hammered vs a partscore. Result merchant?
The losses to bad hand/suit overcalls at the two level are not just from
getting whacked. My partners take my 2/1 overcalls fairly seriously and we can compete to good partscores and games 'without' concern about me overcalling a bad hand/suit 2/1 overcall.
As an added bonusmy 2/1 overcalls rarely get carried out.
Seems the betting line for Fred is that people are betting $5,005 dollars that Fred would not overcall this hand. Playing for coin of the realm or maybe even at IMPs,
bad suit/bad hand 2/1 overcalls might be a losing idea in the long run 'with' some exceptions for the result merchants to point out. I stay fairly close to my bidding methods playing IMPs or MPs. The crazy bids still come out at MPs, but not by my bidding 2/1 overcalls with bad suits and minimum values for a 2/1 overcall.
Fred and Jlall play at very high levels of bridge and neither apparently would overcall this hand with 2Cs. Perhaps they have learned something about the value of overcalling poor suits with minimum values at the two level?
Regards,
Robert
You balanced with 1S and 'after' they rebid their suit, partner doubled for 'penalty' and you left it in with the stiff Q of trump 'plus' AKJx in an unbid suit. Perhaps partners double was more than a little shaky if his values produce minus 870 when the opponents 'rebid' suit was still very minimum?
2S raise is a really fine idea 'opposite' a passed partner. You might be short a trump(Qx plays for no losers sometimes opposite AKxxx while AKxxx opposite xxx
never plays for zero losers), however, you do have extra values and you do have an idea that a penalty would be unlikely to gain.
It is not a really bad idea to pass a ten loser hand opposite a 1H opening with xxx of trumps.
I like to play almost all low(and many high) level doubles as value showing.
I seem to get more penalties 'showing' values rather than 'got them' partner type doubles. The partner with the shortness doubles and the partner with the trump stack passes. Without a trump stack, you bid higher 'at low levels.'
Overcalling bad hands with bad suits at the two level 'sometimes' works and sometimes goes for minus a zillion. Exchange the North and West hands and see how your 2C overcall does. You lose maybe a spade, two hearts, 4 clubs and a diamond. Result merchant?
With values North will balance and 'if' the North and West hands were exchanged,
The auction will go p-1H-p(!)-1S-p-2H instead of you overcalling 2Cs and getting hammered vs a partscore. Result merchant?
The losses to bad hand/suit overcalls at the two level are not just from
getting whacked. My partners take my 2/1 overcalls fairly seriously and we can compete to good partscores and games 'without' concern about me overcalling a bad hand/suit 2/1 overcall.
As an added bonusmy 2/1 overcalls rarely get carried out.
Seems the betting line for Fred is that people are betting $5,005 dollars that Fred would not overcall this hand. Playing for coin of the realm or maybe even at IMPs,
bad suit/bad hand 2/1 overcalls might be a losing idea in the long run 'with' some exceptions for the result merchants to point out. I stay fairly close to my bidding methods playing IMPs or MPs. The crazy bids still come out at MPs, but not by my bidding 2/1 overcalls with bad suits and minimum values for a 2/1 overcall.
Fred and Jlall play at very high levels of bridge and neither apparently would overcall this hand with 2Cs. Perhaps they have learned something about the value of overcalling poor suits with minimum values at the two level?
Regards,
Robert
#25
Posted 2006-October-27, 13:35
flytoox, on Oct 27 2006, 04:11 AM, said:
I dont like 2C either. Bad suit, bad shape.
Suit is not too bad, and though not good shape, pretty good hand overall.
Senshu
#26
Posted 2006-October-27, 14:56
Jlall, on Oct 27 2006, 03:57 AM, said:
HeartA, on Oct 26 2006, 01:22 PM, said:
I believe that, if not majority, a lot of experts would overcall 2C, with 14 count and reasonable C suit (heading with Q109). I think even Fred would do so.
ill bet 5 bucks on fred not overcalling
How much for Brad not overcalling?
Is the word "pass" not in your vocabulary?
So many experts, not enough X cards.
So many experts, not enough X cards.
#27
Posted 2006-October-27, 15:01
Is the word "pass" not in your vocabulary?
So many experts, not enough X cards.
So many experts, not enough X cards.
#28 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-October-27, 16:05
bid_em_up, on Oct 27 2006, 04:01 PM, said:
A more reasonable question is why did you sit for the double?
because his partner made a penalty double hand he had the trump queen and an AK. just a guess
#29
Posted 2006-October-28, 07:22
bid_em_up, on Oct 27 2006, 04:01 PM, said:
1. A more reasonable question is why did you sit for the double?
No values in your suit, partner is going to be off to the wrong lead, stiff in opponents suit, and unmentioned (good) 4 card side suit, all scream bid to me.
2. Better yet, why did you not reopen with X instead of 1S on 5-1-3-4? This hand barely qualifies to reopen. If you were going to do so, I would X. You can tolerate whatever South bids. If the X gets left in, I expect to beat it, as pard likely has the big hand with hearts.
West is blind and thought his partner opened 1D?
No values in your suit, partner is going to be off to the wrong lead, stiff in opponents suit, and unmentioned (good) 4 card side suit, all scream bid to me.
2. Better yet, why did you not reopen with X instead of 1S on 5-1-3-4? This hand barely qualifies to reopen. If you were going to do so, I would X. You can tolerate whatever South bids. If the X gets left in, I expect to beat it, as pard likely has the big hand with hearts.
West is blind and thought his partner opened 1D?
Answering the reasonable questions:
1. Justin has said it all.
2. It superficially looks reasonable to treat my ♠10xxxx as a 4-card suit and double for take-out and if partner leaves it in for penalties, I am happy. However, if partner has 3 spades, I want to compete at the cheapest level. Swap a low club for a spade for example. Worse, if partner is 3343, the prospects of a good result look very bleak.
May 2003: Mission accomplished
Oct 2006: Mission impossible
Soon: Mission illegal
Oct 2006: Mission impossible
Soon: Mission illegal

Help
