[kenrexford]

I still think the "error" might be assessed wrong.

It could be a lack of partnership definitions.

However, I cannot imagine that 2♠ should show this strong of a hand. With this hand, double and resurface later if needed. IMO, 2♠ as described makes more sense as a weaker bid, with Opener not raising because of the weakness implied.

If the problem really is that ths hand is just right but Opener cannot evaluate hands, that's terrible. But, I think the more likely and plausible problem was that 2♠ was deemed a practical underbid and was punished accordingly as a poor judgment call.

[xcurt]

Ken, what else was responder supposed to do? The auction is jammed -- the preemptive effect of 1NT again -- so you frequently don't have invites available. I'm assuming a jump in a new suit by responder is forcing, and since it's to the 3-level, it's game forcing. The alternative is to double 1NT any time you have a forcing hand, but that's unworkable for two reasons

* the opponents are quite likely to have 7 tricks on the go with the hand you're looking at -- and by extension a whole bunch of other possible hands -- 5 clubs, ace, ace. Anyone can bid game when they have 27 HCP -- to win at this level you need to bid constructively to game when you have <23 HCP, not so much shape that you're just bidding game as a two-way shot, but the fit you need to make it a favorite.
* and, you distort too many auctions -- this is analogous to redoubling after 1M-x with 4 card support and a 13 count

So I think saying responder should redouble with this hand is poor system design, and it's also being slavish to point count.

[jdonn]

Ken you realize the actual hand makes 6 right? (It was AKT9x xxx QTxxx - wasn't it? I can't link there right now) It didn't have to be that good for game to be making.

[karlis_ooo]

kenrexford, on Jul 2 2009, 02:54 PM, said:

However, I cannot imagine that 2♠ should show this strong of a hand. With this hand, double and resurface later if needed. IMO, 2♠ as described makes more sense as a weaker bid, with Opener not raising because of the weakness implied.

Agree 100%

[kenrexford]

xcurt, on Jul 2 2009, 03:05 PM, said:

Ken, what else was responder supposed to do? The auction is jammed -- the preemptive effect of 1NT again -- so you frequently don't have invites available. I'm assuming a jump in a new suit by responder is forcing, and since it's to the 3-level, it's game forcing. The alternative is to double 1NT any time you have a forcing hand, but that's unworkable for two reasons

* the opponents are quite likely to have 7 tricks on the go with the hand you're looking at -- and by extension a whole bunch of other possible hands -- 5 clubs, ace, ace. Anyone can bid game when they have 27 HCP -- to win at this level you need to bid constructively to game when you have <23 HCP, not so much shape that you're just bidding game as a two-way shot, but the fit you need to make it a favorite.
* and, you distort too many auctions -- this is analogous to redoubling after 1M-x with 4 card support and a 13 count

So I think saying responder should redouble with this hand is poor system design, and it's also being slavish to point count.

Huh?

"Slavish to point count" is a weird observation. The HCP count is 9, and yet I suggested that a 2♠ call is a gross underbid. That hardly qualifies for that theory.

However, as to what to do. Make 2♠ cooperative, or make 2♠ weak. If 2♠ is weak, double with this hand, bid 2NT, or jump. Or bid 2♣ Lair and correct to 2♠. Something.

But, here's my general take (as specifics are apparently not known):

1. 1NT overcalls come up a lot, and yet this somehow throws people into idiot moves.

2. 1NT overcalls come up a lot, but rarely do partnerships have any intelligent agreements, which is weird.

3. As a GP, 1NT can get hammered a lot more than it is, so the default when in doubt should be to drop the axe and recover later if needed.

[karlis_ooo]

I highly recommend playing transfer type 2♦ 2♥
Maybe it was also applied by given partnership 2♥ being some sort of stronger bid(shapish inv?), and 2♠ most probably intended as weak competive bid

[mikeh]

kenrexford, on Jul 2 2009, 02:54 PM, said:

I still think the "error" might be assessed wrong.

It could be a lack of partnership definitions.

However, I cannot imagine that 2♠ should show this strong of a hand.  With this hand, double and resurface later if needed.  IMO, 2♠ as described makes more sense as a weaker bid, with Opener not raising because of the weakness implied. 

If the problem really is that ths hand is just right but Opener cannot evaluate hands, that's terrible.  But, I think the more likely and plausible problem was that 2♠ was deemed a practical underbid and was punished accordingly as a poor judgment call.

While the actual hand was a maximum for the call, I assume, clearly game was going to have good chances opposite a lesser hand... I'm not sure how josh thinks it made slam...it seems to have 2 red losers... but as josh observed, change the spades to KQ10xx, and game is excellent.

So while I would have bid 4♠, surely even more conservative bidders should see that if partner was prepared to risk 2♠, our hand, with extra trump, 2 fillers for the second suit (I would give 10-1 odds he has diamonds but if he has clubs, we don't mind either) and 2, count them, 2 side Aces... the 3-level must be safe... and if he has top of range, he can move to game over a simple raise.

As for doubling... that is too eggs-in-one-basket for my comfort at imps. Even if we run the spade suit, we haven't beaten them yet, and most partners don't oblige with 2 side Aces! If we can beat them 1, we rate to go plus on offence, so the gain isn't much, and if we go +500-800, we rate to go 620 or 600 on offence... while there is a real risk of a double swing here.

[kenrexford]

FWIW, I would expect something to be invitational in spades here and would so invite. My guess would be 3♦, as it allows Responder to indicate his minor with the weaker hands, but whatever is available. I think blasting hangs partner for really agressive overcalling, which is especially likely when he has clubs as his minor.