[kfay]

Scoring: IMP

(2♠)-3♥-(4♠)-X
(P)-?

---

You overcall, agree?

Now what?

[jdonn]

I think I would go the 4NT then 5♦ route, I could definitely see wanting to play in diamonds since partner could be 1-5 in my suits. Agree obvious overcall obvious pull though.

[jdonn]

Jlall, on May 28 2008, 03:22 PM, said:

jdonn, on May 28 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

I think I would go the 4NT then 5♦ route, I could definitely see wanting to play in diamonds since partner could be 1-5 in my suits. Agree obvious overcall obvious pull though.

And what if partner is 1-4? Diamonds will play terribly. And what if partner with 2-4 opts to play diamonds since the 4-4 is usually better when you are in the realm of making your contract (definitely not if you are going to go down though).

Even opposite the hoped for 1-5 if it is a stiff honor I would rather be in hearts unless diamonds are going to split 2-2.

It's fairly obvious diamonds could definitely be right or definitely be wrong the times partner chooses them, I just think right is more likely. He can even have six diamonds. I really don't think he will choose diamonds with 2-4 though, especially with his spade length he will see that my hand will be forced and it will be hard to set up hearts.

[Halo]

I'll take the chance that these are joke threads.

Pass.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

No, I dont agree with the overcall, but this does
not mean I would not have done it myself.

Now you have to run, partner cant expect a
hand like this, and 5H is most likely the best
place.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gnasher]

Do phrases like "obvious pull" and "you have to run" mean that you play this as a penalty double? For me it would just show high cards, suggesting that we might have a game bonus to protect.

Regardless of the meaning, I'd bid 5♥.

Edit: And I agree with the overcall.

[cherdano]

jdonn, on May 28 2008, 02:31 PM, said:

Jlall, on May 28 2008, 03:22 PM, said:

jdonn, on May 28 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

I think I would go the 4NT then 5♦ route, I could definitely see wanting to play in diamonds since partner could be 1-5 in my suits. Agree obvious overcall obvious pull though.

And what if partner is 1-4? Diamonds will play terribly. And what if partner with 2-4 opts to play diamonds since the 4-4 is usually better when you are in the realm of making your contract (definitely not if you are going to go down though).

Even opposite the hoped for 1-5 if it is a stiff honor I would rather be in hearts unless diamonds are going to split 2-2.

It's fairly obvious diamonds could definitely be right or definitely be wrong the times partner chooses them, I just think right is more likely. He can even have six diamonds. I really don't think he will choose diamonds with 2-4 though, especially with his spade length he will see that my hand will be forced and it will be hard to set up hearts.

If he has ♥Kx I don't see how he could know of problems setting up hearts.

Maybe 4N-5♦ shouldshow 7-4 though, as with 6-5 we would bid the second suit, and with 6-4 we would usually pass the double.

[OleBerg]

Obvious take-out in my partnership, so pass is not an option for me.

4nt, and respect partners choice of diamonds.

[pclayton]

I'm on record as passing, but maybe 5♥ is better.

[karlson]

I would bid 4N. I'm not totally convinced that diamonds will play badly even if partner is something like 1-4 in the reds. If partner's stiff heart is a small one, we're just down off the top in 5h, and at least we have chances in 5d. If he has a spade card, they may not be able to get the tap going. If he doesn't have a spade card, then his clubs rate to be extremely good, and he may just be able just set up clubs and then draw trumps.

So it seems that choosing 5h opposite 1-4 or 1-5 is catering to stiff heart honor, an unfavorable spade position, and bad diamonds. Something like Kxx K xxxx AQxxx. On the other hand, something like xxx x QJxx AKJxx and 5d is very good, while 5h is just down off the top. Simulation anyone? (Hm, I suppose I could do it myself).

[karlson]

I did a quick sim. I assumed that partner would correct with 2 hearts (unless he has so many diamonds that it probably doesn't matter), so I only looked at hands where he has stiff or void in hearts. You would have to do a separate sim for passing vs. bidding. Here are the parameters I used:

predeal    south S, HJT97532, DAKT4, C82
east2s = shape(east, 6xxx - any 65xx - any 6430) && hcp(east)<11 && hcp(east,spades)>3 
west4s = spades(west)>=4 && not shape(west, 4333)
northX = hcp(north)>=10 && hearts(north)<2 && diamonds(north)<7 && clubs(north)<7

I did 36 hands, and looked at all of them together with the DD analysis. A few of them didn't really look right (generally partner didn't have his double) but I kept them all for now. Generally the hands seemed more or less straightforward to play and defend (though certainly some interesting problems) so I only overruled the DD on one or two hands. Also, I'm not as quick as Mike or Francis with the single-dummy analysis, so it would have taken me a while.

What's funny is exactly half the time you were completely dead, that is, no game was making (possibly doubled). On those hands hearts was the better strain by a large margin. On the hands where we were making, however, diamonds was the better by a huge margin. Table:

                   Hearts better     Diamonds Better       Doesn't matter
Making                 1               15                    2
Down                   10              1                     7

Link to the hands

[CSGibson]

karlson, on May 28 2008, 05:27 PM, said:

I did a quick sim. I assumed that partner would correct with 2 hearts (unless he has so many diamonds that it probably doesn't matter), so I only looked at hands where he has stiff or void in hearts. You would have to do a separate sim for passing vs. bidding. Here are the parameters I used:

predeal    south S, HJT97532, DAKT4, C82
east2s = shape(east, 6xxx - any 65xx - any 6430) && hcp(east)<11 && hcp(east,spades)>3 
west4s = spades(west)>=4 && not shape(west, 4333)
northX = hcp(north)>=10 && hearts(north)<2 && diamonds(north)<7 && clubs(north)<7

...

I don't think it's right to assume partner doesn't have 3 hearts. I think he could be any 4-3-3-3, for example, and still think defending is the best option, and probably other shapes as well.

[han]

As Karlson wrote, with 3 hearts partner would always correct to 5H. So if you are only interested in 4NT vs 5H then you can ignore those hands.

[Apollo81]

I think partner having 1-5 in the reds is pretty likely so I would bid 4N