[glen]

Scoring: IMP

---

Pass-1♠(11-16, 5+♠s)-?

Overcall or not?

For the story, please see:

Ulf Nilsson's Bridge Blog

Do you think this theory is valid?

[Gerben42]

I think that many overcalled 3♦ opposite a passed partner, forcing opps to bid (and make) 4♥. Anyway, I'd like to see more examples before I'm convinced

[whereagles]

yeah, 2♦ or 3♦, depending on how much wine one had at dinner

As for Nilsson, well, unless I get to hear his explanations, I'll rank his theory as "crackpot".

[Fluffy]

The best contract is 5♣, and I don't see how bidding 2♦ helps anyone.

[brianshark]

I usually just pay no attention to the 4 card suit, or honours in it and look at the rest of my hand. If I don't have a decent suit and an honour or two outside, I'll just pass. In the hand above, I have no outside tricks so I'd just pass. I'd be interested to know what the best theoretical call is here.

[gnasher]

Gerben42, on Jan 31 2008, 02:26 PM, said:

I think that many overcalled 3♦ opposite a passed partner, forcing opps to bid (and make) 4♥. Anyway, I'd like to see more examples before I'm convinced

The full deal was:

Scoring: IMP

---

If you'd overcalled 3D and they bid to 4H, wouldn't you make a Lightner Double? It seems to me that on this layout overcalling makes it considerably more likely that you'll get a plus score.

[P_Marlowe]

2D, ... but 3D is ok as well,
although the spade length
would stop me a littel bit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Halo]

I like 3D because it takes away three diamonds as a cue bid. But certainly I'm bidding diamonds.

[Apollo81]

I don't like a 3♦ bid here. The suit is good but it's not solid, and we have length in RHO's suit. Hearts could also be our best strain. I'd bid 3♦ if you forced me to choose between that and pass.

[mikeh]

gnasher, on Jan 31 2008, 09:16 AM, said:

Gerben42, on Jan 31 2008, 02:26 PM, said:

I think that many overcalled 3♦ opposite a passed partner, forcing opps to bid (and make) 4♥. Anyway, I'd like to see more examples before I'm convinced

The full deal was:

Scoring: IMP

---

If you'd overcalled 3D and they bid to 4H, wouldn't you make a Lightner Double? It seems to me that on this layout overcalling makes it considerably more likely that you'll get a plus score.

It would never occur to me that the double was a lightner double... it would just be penalty. And, if it were Lightner, then (unless clubs were bid and raised, in which case I would be doubling and leading the club A myself) it would not occur to me that it showed a void in an unbid side suit

[mikeh]

officeglen, on Jan 31 2008, 08:23 AM, said:

Dealer: North Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠ Q743 ♥ J93 ♦ AKJ973 ♣

Pass-1♠(11-16, 5+♠s)-?

Overcall or not?

For the story, please see:

Ulf Nilsson's Bridge Blog

Do you think this theory is valid?

No: I don't think the theory is valid.

One cannot construct or test a theory on a handful of hands, especially when the sample is chosen by reference only to hands where it worked.

Without doing any form of detailed analysis, just consider the number of saves/preemptions that this approach misses. After all, on the hands he passes, partner rates to be short in opener's suit and so may well have a fit for ours... and we are staying out????

Also, consider: I believe it to be widely accepted, and properly so, that most pairs have better methods in uncontested auctions than they do in competitive bidding... which is precisely why the last 40 years has seen a huge change in the willingness of good players to get into auctions on any excuse. There will always be hands that hit the seams of any method, and so there will be some hands where the competition makes them guess better than they would left to their own devices, but this will be a minority.

We lost a match in the last regional I played when partner opened a weak 2, caught Mike Passell with a thin overcall and his partner with an even thinner raise. They reached a bad game and it made, and we lost. Had we passed, they would not have reached game. Should we then construct a theory that says that weak 2 bids are bad because they drive the opps into games they wouldn't reach otherwise?

I can't be bothered to try to build a simulation, but it strikes me as almost certainly a long-term loser, in a big, big way.

[jdonn]

Can someone summarize the link? I can't reach it at work. In any case anything but 2♦ seems terrible to me. I think it's a very strange trend in bridge lately the people seem to preempt on hands that are not only strong but also unsuitable after their partner passes, and I see a lot of loss from it.

[brianshark]

Don't bid 2/1 overcall in a lower ranking suit if you have a side 4 card suit to an honour in the opening suit. Doesn't justify, just puts it out as a theory and asks people to make up their own minds. Then gives the above example hand as an example of a time where it worked out.

I find Mikeh's post a pretty good analysis on why this theory is probably nonsense.

[han]

It would be nice if Ulven would post a detailed argument for his theory, either here or in his blog.

[gnasher]

mikeh, on Jan 31 2008, 05:37 PM, said:

It would never occur to me that the double was a lightner double... it would just be penalty. And, if it were Lightner, then (unless clubs were bid and raised, in which case I would be doubling and leading the club A myself) it would not occur to me that it showed a void in an unbid side suit

It would be an unusual hand that was worth only a premptive 3D on the first round, albeit opposite a passed hand, but had enough defensive strength to double a more-or-less freely-bid game on the next.

A greater flaw in my argument is that they might run to 5C, which was cold.

[gwnn]

jdonn, on Jan 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

Can someone summarize the link? I can't reach it at work. In any case anything but 2♦ seems terrible to me. I think it's a very strange trend in bridge lately the people seem to preempt on hands that are not only strong but also unsuitable after their partner passes, and I see a lot of loss from it.

"Don't overcall on the two level with honor-fourth in their suit. E.g. I passed this hand and got a real nice score."

edit: an exact quote is "you shouldn't overcall 2x over 1M with 4-cards headed by a top honour in their suit. Not even with a good 6-card suit of your own."

[ASkolnick]

I hate experts who give opinions without any valid theory behind it.

I can at least see the argument if the "overcaller" is under the bidder. The problem is then your opponents shortness is after your shortness. If it goes

1H-P-1S-2D

Now the danger becomes that your RHO can overruff your partner, trump promote etc. because chances are RHO has equal or less length in the suit. Also, your non-ace points are then much more vulnerable to being led through.

And as for the result, isn't that a bit timid with a 6H-5C 10 HCP hand to pass 2S? I don't think the result had anything to do with the not overcalling.

[sartaj1]

I really enjoy reading Ulf's blog for he has lots of interesting things to say.
I say this so that any potential reader does not get dissuaded by the "crackpot" style judgements delivered by the audience here so far...

On the issue of this particular hand, there are many reasons why a pass could work out well. Holding length in their suit is often the first sign of a misfit and a misfit usually means a minus score to the ones who bid.

While i would personally overcall 2D (and think that 3D is nuts), i wouldnt be surprised if pass was the winning action, especially opposite a passed partner.

Aiming to track how this theory (of passing) goes from now on though....

[han]

sartaj1, on Jan 31 2008, 08:54 PM, said:

On the issue of this particular hand, there are many reasons why a pass could work out well. Holding length in their suit is often the first sign of a misfit and a misfit usually means a minus score to the ones who bid.

It is one thing to say that holding cards in their suit is a negative factor, another to say "one should not overcall with Hxxx in their suit".