[y66]

MPs r/w

We deal and pass with 7, QT654, Q7, QJ983. LHO bids 1S. Pard bids 1N=15-18. RHO bids 2S. Now what?

We play systems on over 1N overcalls. X=penalty. Does lebensohl apply here?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

you already answered your question yourself,
you said, that you play system on after a 1NT
overcall.
If you play Lebensohl after a 1NT opening, you
play it in the given situation as well.

And playing (or not playing) X as penalty does not
matter, unless you play X after a 1NT opeing as
neg.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[y66]

Systems on = systems on. Yup. Am making this game too hard. Thanks for clarifying.

As for inviting or forcing to game, pard and I thought it was close. Turns out that hand makes 4H approx 40% of the time, per 200 hand simulation. Nice shape, but not enough high cards for the 4-level apparently.

7, QT654, 72, KQ983 makes approx 50%.

[gwnn]

I wouldn't try for game with your quacky hand. Partner has spade wastage, who knows if the ♦Q will work or not... the second hand you showed us looks about 1.5 tricks better.

[kenrexford]

I wish we were playing negative doubles here, as I like that option.

[Cascade]

kenrexford, on Mar 1 2008, 05:05 AM, said:

I wish we were playing negative doubles here, as I like that option.

I too would prefer negative doubles although not sure I would try one with this hand.

Penalty doubles must be very low on frequency on this auction. Three players have already claimed the spade suit - opener has five, partner has a stopper and responder has a raise. In this scenario I don't have KJ10x very often to double with. And further I don't know what partner's stopper is - say I have a singleton - partner could have Ax or Kx or something like KQ109. All of this means I am not the one who is going to be able to decide whether we have a penalty of2♠.

[Cascade]

Jlall, on Mar 1 2008, 09:55 AM, said:

What bad thing are you worried about happening if you X? I suppose they might make sometimes if partner passes, but they will usually go down and partner won't usually pass anyways.

... or playing 3♦ with a decent 5=3 heart fit.

[kenrexford]

Cascade, on Feb 29 2008, 04:14 PM, said:

Jlall, on Mar 1 2008, 09:55 AM, said:

What bad thing are you worried about happening if you X? I suppose they might make sometimes if partner passes, but they will usually go down and partner won't usually pass anyways.

... or playing 3♦ with a decent 5=3 heart fit.

And?

[Cascade]

and what?

[Cascade]

Jlall, on Mar 1 2008, 01:29 PM, said:

Cascade, on Feb 29 2008, 04:14 PM, said:

Jlall, on Mar 1 2008, 09:55 AM, said:

What bad thing are you worried about happening if you X? I suppose they might make sometimes if partner passes, but they will usually go down and partner won't usually pass anyways.

... or playing 3♦ with a decent 5=3 heart fit.

I thought it went without saying that I would bid 3H over 3D. This seems like a good description of my hand. Over 2N or 3C I can play clubs, and over a 3H bid I can shoot out a game. This seems way better than lebensohl then guess what to do.

I suppose it depends on what bid and double means. I usually play that as strong - but i suppose that is not standard.

I am thinking this hand is getting very close to invitational if we can invite and find out if partner has a maximum and close to GF vulnerable at IMPs (yes I know the conditions of the problem).

[kenrexford]

Cascade, on Feb 29 2008, 07:11 PM, said:

and what?

And why are you passing 3♦?

You have a club-heart two-suiter. I cannot imagine an auction to 3♦ unless partner bids 3♦, in which case you would bid 3♥.

I suppose you could have a redouble, followed by a pass from partner, 3♣ by you, and then a conversion to 3♦ by partner if 3♣ is doubled. But then I still think I'd bid 3♥.

If you elected to pass 3♦ at this point, because you believe that partner has six diamonds and two hearts, or five very good diamonds, then you took a position, so you live with it.