[Cascade]

On auctions like:

(2♦) 3♣ (Pass) ?

What methods do you have to identify stoppers for 3NT?

Is a new suit best played as a five-card suit or some sort of No Trump probe?

Is there any difference if the opponent suggests a fit for one major:

(2♦) Pass (2♠*) 3♣
(Pass) ?

* Pass or correct suggesting long hearts and therefore opener's pass suggests spades - although we had this exact auction recently and opener did have hearts.

There are similar problems after a major suit overcall:

(2♦) 2♥ (Pass) ?

Is 2♠ natural or a cue?

Thanks for any ideas.

[whereagles]

Cascade, on Apr 30 2007, 07:56 AM, said:

On auctions like:
(2♦) 3♣ (Pass) ?

1. What methods do you have to identify stoppers for 3NT?

2. Is a new suit best played as a five-card suit or some sort of No Trump probe?

3. Is there any difference if the opponent suggests a fit for one major:

(2♦) Pass (2♠*) 3♣
(Pass) ?

* Pass or correct suggesting long hearts and therefore opener's pass suggests spades - although we had this exact auction recently and opener did have hearts.

------------

There are similar problems after a major suit overcall:

(2♦) 2♥ (Pass) ?

4. Is 2♠ natural or a cue?

1. None. You don't need that anyway. When was the last time opps had AKQ and cashed them out?

2. Best played as showing a five carder.

3. Not really.

4. Natural, constructive, forcing for 1 round. One of you hit opener's suit, but, unless you play 2♠ as natural, you'll never find out who.

[FrancesHinden]

Assuming that you are playing suit overcalls as natural, constructive, you have one particular problem that you don't have over a normal pre-empt, namely that you have no 'cue-bid' available as a general forcing call.

After a 2-major overcall it seems to me to be sufficiently useful to have a forcing bid available that it's worth giving up either a bid in the other major or a natural 2NT. I've always played that a bid of the other major is to be treated as a cue bid, on the grounds that the chance partner has overcalled in their suit is sufficiently low that you can not worry. A jump in the other major, however, is natural (and 3S is forcing). On reflection, I wonder if playing 2NT as artificial is better, although a natural 2NT is more useful here than in some auctions, as the overcall has a very wide range.

After a 3m overcall I just play suits as natural and forcing. Again, there's a mild argument for playing (2D) 3C (P) 3D as a 'cue bid', but the auction doesn't come up often enough that I'm prepared to risk it.

A couple of other points we've established:
- you don't know opener's suit for certain until opener has passed it doubled (although you might like to think that e.g 2D P 2S 3C P implies hearts, the opponents won't; passing 2D P 2M with the other major is a well-known psyche; and I know a pair who have agreed - and alert to the effect that - Non-vulnerable 2D P 3H asks partner to pass whichever his suit is, unless doubled)

- After an artificial double of the multi, we play lebensohl by 4th hand, subject to obvious modifications and depending on 3rd hand's actions

- if 3rd hand doubles the overcall, redouble is strong and other bids are natural NF;
- if 3rd hand bids over the overcall, double is responsive and 2NT (if available) is lebensohl

- double by 4th hand after 2nd seat passes is "take-out" but may be super-strong with the major doubled (2D P 2H/3H x is in theory take-out of hearts, but if the doubler then bids hearts that is natural). A normal t/o double of the other major waits and doubles next round, but if you are strong enough you can't afford to, particularaly against NV opponents.

- we virtually always act on decent values in second seat unless we have a very pure take-out double of a major (e.g. a 1444 14-count), as we don't like it when 2D is passed out and we have a good hand. Passing then protecting with suit bid is thus always weaker than immediate action. Passing then bidding NT is unusual.

[1eyedjack]

FrancesHinden, on May 3 2007, 10:31 AM, said:

- we virtually always act on decent values in second seat unless we have a very pure take-out double of a major (e.g. a 1444 14-count), as we don't like it when 2D is passed out and we have a good hand.

That is a point that I hadn't really thought about. Probably because I have never encountered it. But as it is the sort of thing that I might do I suppose I should be prepared.

For the same basic reason (being prepared for the opponents doing what I might do in their place) I tend to place a narrower definition on the second seat double of 2D than others do in their defences: When I am playing the multi we play that responder's pass of the opponent's double shows Diamond tolerance (4 is enough, but partly because of some of the other options in our multi) and suggestion to play there. If the double is nebulous in its definition of diamond length advancer is in doubt about whether opener will stand the contract in 2D doubled (by contrast, if he can be certain that opener will pull to his major, advancer can pass in comfort if having nothing particular to say). Expecting opponents to play similar methods, I tend to require that the double of the multi is takeout of Diamonds (even though it is not a suit suggested by opener), and with a takeout of a major (even if not "pure") we pass and reopen next time. I may have to rethink that if opponents are likely to pass out 2D in a huge misfit. They are taking quite a risk if the opener contains some strong options, which is presumably why I have yet to encounter it. Designing your system to cope with psyches is perhaps sensible, but where that design compromises your methods when they happen not to psyche may be taking it a step too far.

[inquiry]

The only thing that probably works consistently is to have a gimmick. One such gimmick is something like this.

(2D)-3C-(P)-3D

Should be a gimmick. this would be looking for major stoppers, opener can bid 3NT with both, or bid the one with a stopper. Playing this, responder can bid naturally a major he has over 3C

(2D)-3D-(P)-?

No room for the gimmick, so you need to harnest a multi-meaning bid. 3H has to be either HEARTS or a stopper. 3D bidder doesn't know which, so he bids 3S if he has heart support, 3NT if he has spade stopper without heart support. Advancers 3NT over 3S shows heart guard, and obviously no spade quard (else 3NT instead of 3H).

(I did not come up with this defense).

[Cascade]

Thanks to all of those that have responded to this.

I had another problem come up on the weekend. While the actual hand was extreme the principle of the problem will be needed for less extreme hands.

Does anyone have an artificial forcing bid after the opponent's multi has been doubled? I guess some Lebensohl developments could show a strong hand?

Say e.g. you have game values for whatever your double shows and are 4-4 in the majors - presuming the double did not identify a specific four-card (or longer) major. What would you bid.

The hand that occurred involved a slam decision:

Scoring: MPs

(2♦*) X (Pass) ?

---

What ideas are there for a forcing bid?

[Free]

We like to treat the 2♦ opening as a 2♠ opening. This means the immediate Dbl shows takeout with short ♠s. Waiting a round is the same, but considers the opening to be 2♥. (this also means we sometimes have penalty doubles, like 2♦-p-2♠-p;p-Dbl)

So to come back to your question: 2♦-Dbl-p-? we have 2♠ as a forcing bid since we consider it a 2♠ opening. Reverse your Majors and the auction may well go 2♦-p-2♥-p;p-Dbl-p-... and now you have ♥ cuebids as forcing bids.

I really like this style, but sometimes I wonder if it would be better to have the initial action opposite 2♥ openers instead of 2♠. If the auction goes 2♦-p-2♠-p;3♥, you may be too high to act.

[Gerben42]

What was the Pass of 2♦X?

If it shows ♦ we normally treat it as a weak 2 in ♦, if it doesn't show ♦ then opener cannot pass and I can pass (not a likely scenario but this is how some stone-age Multi works).

Conversely if I have ♦ I don't need to bid them as I'm already playing ♦, so 3♦ should be art. forcing.


2♦ X p 2NT would also be Lebensohl with ♦ as their suit.

[whereagles]

Cascade, if you're playing Lebenshol over the multi, it's easy: just bid 3♥, which is by definition forcing (NF would go via 2NT)

[skjaeran]

whereagles, on May 14 2007, 12:49 PM, said:

Cascade, if you're playing Lebenshol over the multi, it's easy: just bid 3♥, which is by definition forcing (NF would go via 2NT)

I don't agree - most here would play 3♥ as constructive to invitational in that setting, and 2NT -> 3♥ as non-constructive.

[inquiry]

Cascade, on May 13 2007, 10:28 PM, said:

Thanks to all of those that have responded to this.

I had another problem come up on the weekend.  While the actual hand was extreme the principle of the problem will be needed for less extreme hands.

Does anyone have an artificial forcing bid after the opponent's multi has been doubled?  I guess some Lebensohl developments could show a strong hand? 

Say e.g. you have game values for whatever your double shows and are 4-4 in the majors - presuming the double did not identify a specific four-card (or longer) major.  What would you bid.

The hand that occurred involved a slam decision:

Dealer: West Vul: All Scoring: MPs

♠   ♥ AKQJxxxx ♦ Jx ♣ Qxx

(2♦*) X (Pass) ?

What ideas are there for a forcing bid?

This hand wouldn't worry me playing Multi-versus-Multi

Partner doesn't ahve a balance dhand (he would have bid 2H or 3NT)
Partner does not have a minor one suited hand (he would have bid 2S or 2NT)
So partner either has a strong 4144 hand (and we know he is short in hearts), or he and opener both have spades.
Partner can still have 19-22 balanced as well, leaving just 7 hcp for opener.

Over the double, we respond pretty much as if partner had opened 2D

(2D)-X-(P)=?

• 2H = pass correct, weak
  
• 2♠ pass/correct, tolerance for hearts or even game try in hearts, else 2♥
  
• 2NT = relay seeking more info (forcing).

So we would have could have started with 2NT. Partner would bid..

3C = balanced big hand (19-22), 3C over that is stayman
3D = min hand with hearts, or maximum (whatever that is) with spades
3H = max hand with hearts
3S = min hand with spades
3NT = 4405 or 4415 with short minor

Or we could have started with 3H over 2D(x) which shows hearts and is 100% forcing and natural.

[FrancesHinden]

skaeran, on May 14 2007, 09:50 PM, said:

whereagles, on May 14 2007, 12:49 PM, said:

Cascade, if you're playing Lebenshol over the multi, it's easy: just bid 3♥, which is by definition forcing (NF would go via 2NT)

I don't agree - most here would play 3♥ as constructive to invitational in that setting, and 2NT -> 3♥ as non-constructive.

I don't agree.
We aren't told what the double actually meant, but if it showed, say, 13-15 balanced or very strong; and if the pass from opener's partner was just neutral, then

2♥ = non-constructive competing in hearts
2NT then 3♥ = invitational with hearts
3♥ = forcing with hearts

I agree that it could be useful to have 3♦ as a neutral forcing bid here, though I admit in practice it's so rare to play people who play pass of the double as diamonds, combined with my having a balanced game forcing-type hand, that I just pass and bid on the next round.

[keylime]

The defense I use with Larry is the Granovetter defense, so the equivalent auction is (2♦) 2♥* <-- a good club overcall.

In this auction we play along the lines of cue showing bids (think 2 suiters and followons) that probe to 3NT, with 2NT as an invite of the overcall.

[lowerline]

I play that a 2NT advance to a takeout double is GF. Technically, this is probably not the best solution, but it is simple and effective.