[helene_t]

(1m)-x-(p)-2M
(p)-2N

I thought this should be appr. 14 points, ie just short of a 1NT overcall. Non-forcing but forward going. However I can see some advantages of playing it as 18+ as well. Just needed to check.

[the hog]

Have always played it as a hand too good for a 1NT overcall. Otherwise why did you X in the first place?

The one exception to this is if you play Raptor, when it shows the strength for a 1NT overcall.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

2NT shows a hand too strong for an 1NT overcall.

If 2NT would show a hand, too weak for a 1NT overcall,
with which shape did you make the t/o X, keeping in mind
that we wont have a fit for partner?

For that matter, 2M will be limited to at most 9/10HCP, for
some even to 8HCP, i.e. if 2NT showes a haand to weak to
make a 1 NT overcall, the partnership will have at best 24HCP
between them, depending on your min. requirements for a
1NT overcall, i.e. our combined HCP power will not be enough
to make 3NT a paylable spot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

This is invitational, i.e. after

(1♦)-dbl-(P)-2♥
..(P)-2NT

Kxxx
KJx
Kx
Axxx

You can, ofc, play it as 18-19, but it's not necessary. That hand just bids 3NT or cues.

[mikeh]

I think that it is standard to play it as 19+... too much for a 1N overcall.

This treatment dates back to the era in which it was standard to at least consider passing 1minor with 4333 14 counts. It MIGHT make sense to play it as 14 with a stopper and 3 card support if you routinely double with such hands, but I wouldn't espouse it.

1stly, such hands usually won't make game a good spot opposite a 2M response... you will almost certainly need partner to have a maximum and even then we rate to be on a maximum of 24 hcp (which is fine) and only one stopper in a suit where they rate to have some length (which is not fine) and no real source of tricks (also not fine... imagine partner with Kxx AJxx xx Jxxx... that is a 2♥ advance over a double of 1♦.. picture typical 4=3=3=3 14 counts for partner).

2ndly, while 19+ is rare, exactly 14 4333 is hardly a common holding either.. so using it as invitational aims at a very small target.

And I disagree with whereagles that the 19+ hand can always simply cue bid or bid 3N. Often times, it will be useful to be able to bid a forcing 2N to allow clarification of the degree of fit in the major, should advancer hold 5 of them, and the solidity of the stoppers in the opps' suit. Plus that treatment, to my mind, overloads the cue bid... which I think should set trump.... after all, all new suits by doubler are natural and forcing, so we don't need to cue to force with our own suit, and we can bid notrump with stoppers, again, forcing.

[whereagles]

Well, invitational is standard in some overcall systems. There certainly exist hands that would like to make such a natural bid after doubling first.

[helene_t]

Thanks Mike, your arguments for playing it as stronger than a 1NT overcall (and hence forcing) are convincing.

Over here, 16-18 is a common range for 1NT overcalls. Given that, should I still assume the 2NT rebid to promise (even) more?

[skjaeran]

I play a 1NT overcall as 15-18. Double followed by NT at lowest level shows 19-21. I don't see any reason to change that on this auction.

[benlessard]

In standard its showing 19+ and is forcing.

Its another reason why i prefer to play heavy 1Nt overcall (good 16 to 19) so for me 2Nt as showing 15-bad 16 make sense.

[awm]

I agree forcing, but not sure it is 19+.

For example, say RHO opens 1♣ and I hold:

AQxx
Kxx
Axxx
Kx

While one could overcall 1NT, double seems like a better call. And over 2♥ from partner, we should have a game and it seems reasonable to try 2NT...