2♣ overcall is?
again&again
#3
Posted 2009-July-16, 16:43
#4
Posted 2009-July-17, 01:16
#5
Posted 2009-July-17, 02:44
George Carlin
#6
Posted 2009-July-17, 03:14
http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer...=e&b=6&a=1D2C3D
->
#7
Posted 2009-July-17, 05:04
2C, is fairly clear cut.
Over 3D it depends on agreement, best would be to have a X
as t/o availabe, the X will alway show some tolerance for
clubs, if not, simply bid 4C, or pass..
Better of course would be, if you have 3H as a fit bid av. av.,
but that is an agreement I would not bother to have unless you
reach a certain stage, and even than it is just luxury.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#8
Posted 2009-July-20, 07:49
To me this looks like a 3♣ overcall, not 2♣.
#9
Posted 2009-July-20, 08:06
#10
Posted 2009-July-20, 08:10
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#11
Posted 2009-July-20, 08:27
nick_s, on Jul 20 2009, 08:49 AM, said:
To me this looks like a 3♣ overcall, not 2♣.
3C is an option, the main issue with 3C is, that you are
green vs. red, and you may bid 3C without the king of
diamonds.
Since p did not yet have the chance to speak, it is a
matter of partnership agreement, if bidding 3C is a good
idea.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#12
Posted 2009-July-20, 08:43
I don't say that I would never preempt on an empty suit, but suit quality is a factor, and here there is a very reasonable (better) alternative in 2♣.
#13
Posted 2009-July-20, 08:51
karlis_ooo, on Jul 17 2009, 04:14 AM, said:
http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer...=e&b=6&a=1D2C3D
->
Biddig goes [1♦]-2♣-[3♦]-X -//- Pass - ???
P_Marlowe suggested 4♣ or Pass...
What is (wrong) with 3N?
#14
Posted 2009-July-20, 09:02
karlis_ooo, on Jul 20 2009, 11:51 PM, said:
P_Marlowe suggested 4♣ or Pass...
What is (wrong) with 3N?
When you decide to bid 2 club on this hand and on a hand with full values, you not only muddy the waters for your opponents but for your partner too.
Now you have to clear it up a bid and show that you have a quite weak hand within the possible range of a 2 ♣ call.
3 NT does not limit the hand. You have just one stopper and maybe less when they have another suit to lead through partner, who rates to be short in diamonds himself.
So I would hate 3 NT and bid 4 ♣.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#15
Posted 2009-July-20, 09:46
Nick
#16
Posted 2009-July-20, 09:49
655321, on Jul 20 2009, 09:43 AM, said:
I don't say that I would never preempt on an empty suit, but suit quality is a factor, and here there is a very reasonable (better) alternative in 2♣.
Thanks for the lucid explanation.
So a wide ranging 2♣ overcall is becoming standard in some (most?) expert circles. I remember reading Sabine Auken advocating this in her book also.
I have two regular partnerships. I've discussed this with one partner and he doesn't want to play (1♦)-2♣ this way even though he understands the motivation. The other partner would just flat out call me crazy for even suggesting this.
Just how widespread is this 2♣ overcalling style anyway?
#17
Posted 2009-July-20, 11:16
655321, on Jul 20 2009, 09:43 AM, said:
I don't say that I would never preempt on an empty suit, but suit quality is a factor, and here there is a very reasonable (better) alternative in 2♣.
Wow even 655321 does not bid 3C, it must be madness!
#18
Posted 2009-July-20, 11:17
nick_s, on Jul 20 2009, 10:49 AM, said:
655321, on Jul 20 2009, 09:43 AM, said:
I don't say that I would never preempt on an empty suit, but suit quality is a factor, and here there is a very reasonable (better) alternative in 2♣.
Thanks for the lucid explanation.
So a wide ranging 2♣ overcall is becoming standard in some (most?) expert circles. I remember reading Sabine Auken advocating this in her book also.
I have two regular partnerships. I've discussed this with one partner and he doesn't want to play (1♦)-2♣ this way even though he understands the motivation. The other partner would just flat out call me crazy for even suggesting this.
Just how widespread is this 2♣ overcalling style anyway?
I think its pretty normal to overcall aggressively with a 6 card suit, and conservatively (to say the least imo) with a 5 card suit, esp at favorable vulnerability. As Jdonn said, the 6th trump is better than a king, so you should adjust accordingly.
#19
Posted 2009-July-20, 11:37
#20
Posted 2009-July-20, 14:09
jdonn, on Jul 20 2009, 12:37 PM, said:
Agreed with your fine explanation and I bid 2♣ here.

Help
