[Gerben42]

Scoring: IMP

---

So, what will it be?

Edit again: RHO Opens 1♠

[helene_t]

LHO? Maybe it was RHO since preempting is an option ....

[Gerben42]

Thanks, that is why I need this "preview". I even cannot get my posts right the second time.

[Apollo81]

2♦

[paulg]

2♦

Wrong distribution (too flat) for 3♦.

Paul

[han]

2D.

[pclayton]

You had to give me my favorite hold-em hand (and birthday - 7-2) in both majors? And the beer?

As tempting as those combos are, I still pass.

[P_Marlowe]

3D

Matter of style and a mood thing
There are days I would just bid 2D,
maybe even most of the days, but
certainly never pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[skjaeran]

Pretty minimum IMO, but I'll venture 2♦.

[kenrexford]

3♦ for me. Reasons?

1. You have about the right LTC for 3♦
2. 2♦ makes it easier than passing for the opponents to find a possible heart fit
3. Partner will expect a better hand for 2♦, at least if he is playing with me

This, however, is more stylistic than anything. My personal preference is for a 2♦ overcall to show a hand that has better game-going prospects and for 3♦ to handle hands like this. Others may legitimately have a different style. The downside to my approach that I can see is a greater risk of being doubled a level higher and more frequently, as well as more frequent passes, perhaps. The upside is that I jam more often at the higher level and gain more confidence if partner wants to move over my 2♦ calls.

[gnasher]

pclayton, on Mar 3 2008, 05:10 PM, said:

You had to give me ... the beer?

Isn't that a reason for not bidding, or at least for not bidding diamonds?

[Fluffy]

2♦ is not an option with such a weak hand, it can be either pass or 3♦ depending on your style, I'd go for 3♦.

[Gerben42]

Quote

Isn't that a reason for not bidding, or at least for not bidding diamonds?

I should've included 1NT for this reason?

[whereagles]

Hum.. this isn't trivial, but I'll try 2♦. I probably won't preempt LHO out of his hearts, but I might just give him a problem if he has like 7-9 hcp and flattish shape.

3♦ would sure be quite more bothersome, but the shape is definitely wrong.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Mar 3 2008, 11:37 AM, said:

To me this is the most obvious 2D bid ever. I think 3D vul is suicidal. There's just not enough upside to roll the dice with a 6322 hand vulnerable. This is of course a matter of style, etc, but I just don't believe in gambling with this type of hand.

Edit: Just noticed some votes for pass. Hate that as well. This is a great dummy for 3N which we may miss if I pass, gets a good lead in against either NT or hearts, is strong enough that I'm not TOO worried about 2D X (decent amount of tricks, I'm sure some people overcall with less tricks than this fairly often, good D9 etc), alleviates any "do I balance or not" problems I may have later, etc etc.

What hand across the table are you concerned about that if we pass we'll miss 3N?

[jdonn]

I like 2♦ much better than 3♦ or pass (would pick 3♦ between those if I had to choose.) I think Justin put it pretty well overall. The chances of there being 3NT are fairly low but it certainly could happen, and there are other good reasons to be bidding anyway.

[awm]

I don't mind pass here. Bidding 3♦ at vulnerable seems way too dangerous.

There are definite advantages to a 2♦ bid, as Justin has pointed out. But there are also problems, for example partner may try to take a sacrifice in 5♦ that doesn't work out well because our hand is so flat, or partner may try to penalize a game bid by opponents that doesn't work out well because our hand has so little defense. These possibilities seem more likely to me than partner having enough for 3NT but being unable to bid, if potentially a bit less costly.

Anyways, I'll go with 2♦ with pass a close second choice and 3♦ not in the running.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Mar 3 2008, 02:37 PM, said:

I think 3D vul is suicidal. There's just not enough upside to roll the dice with a 6322 hand vulnerable. This is of course a matter of style, etc, but I just don't believe in gambling with this type of hand.

So young to have already lost both of 'em. So sad. LOL