I might start with 2
♣ but I'm not sure how to continue, nor am I confident that 2
♣ passed out is a good spot. I'd consider overcalling 3N but that's probably crazzy. Dbl is ok in some styles, not in mine though.
barmar, on Jun 25 2007, 10:10 PM, said:
These days people get away with all kinds of crappy overcalls, because it tends to be hard for the opponents to make penalty doubles. Think about all the times you've prayed for partner to make a reopening double so you could convert it to penalty, but instead of doubling he rebids a suit. The more artificial doubles you have in your system, the more opportunity the opponents have to bid on junk and not get punished for it.
I beg to differ. If opps are poor competitive bidders, I'll interfere more readily. In particular, if they don't have a negative double at the two-level, it's more attractive to jam them. In fact I think that overcalls have become more sound in the last decades. This is partly because of lighter openings but also because of better competitive methods, in particular artificial doubles.
If partner reopens with a double whenever he would have passed a penalty double, you don't have this problem. If, on the other hand, p only reopens with a double if he has reasonable defense, you'll miss some penalty opportunities but on the other hand you'll be able to pass some reopening doubles with hands that couldn't double for penalty.
Quote
But not only is it hard to punish them, but you also end up going wrong in the play. It's great to study books like "How to Read Your Opponent's Cards", but if they bid randomly you're going to make wrong inferences. Which, of course, is why they do it -- making things easy for declarer is not high on their priority list.

True, but you should above all read your partner's cards. And if opps bid randomly in order to confuse me, I'll win in the long run because they confuse each other as well.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket