[gwnn]

no difference for me (and I believe few people will say yes). maybe if I liked 1NT I'd be less likely to do it V than NV.

[P_Marlowe]

Rev Dino, on Dec 31 2009, 06:21 AM, said:

One more thing for everybody: any difference if VUL or not?

No.

[hanp]

I don't agree with P_Marlowe about this difference between Europeans and Americans. For example, I am willing to bet that virtually all top Italian players would double with this hand, and most of them are European. The one good Dutch bridge player that I asked wasn't sure what the consensus in the Netherlands would be but she didn't think any would pick 2D. MFA and fluffy are high level Danish and Spanish players btw.

I don't think the Croatian poll should be taken seriously, almost a third voted for 2D which is horrible to my mind.

[gnasher]

hanp, on Jan 1 2010, 01:39 PM, said:

I don't agree with P_Marlowe about this difference between Europeans and Americans. For example, I am willing to bet that virtually all top Italian players would double with this hand, and most of them are European. The one good Dutch bridge player that I asked wasn't sure what the consensus in the Netherlands would be but she didn't think any would pick 2D. MFA and fluffy are high level Danish and Spanish players btw.

I don't think the Croatian poll should be taken seriously, almost a third voted for 2D which is horrible to my mind.

I think it should be taken seriously as an indication of what people bid in Croatia. The problem with comparing "Europeans" with "Americans" is that Europe, being made up of fifty countries with fifty different traditions, isn't at all homogeneous. There's no reason to expect a Croatian to bid more like a Dutchman than an American.

[hanp]

While I cannot judge whether that poll is really indicative of what other people in Croatia bid, I agree with the rest of what you wrote.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Jan 1 2010, 09:05 AM, said:

The problem with comparing "Europeans" with "Americans" is that Europe, being made up of fifty countries with fifty different traditions, isn't at all homogeneous. There's no reason to expect a Croatian to bid more like a Dutchman than an American.

Neither is America, made up of more than 50 states. Although it may well be more homogeneous than Europe is. Still you will get different answers to bidding polls in different areas of the country in many cases.

[cherdanno]

jdonn, on Jan 1 2010, 01:42 PM, said:

gnasher, on Jan 1 2010, 09:05 AM, said:

The problem with comparing "Europeans" with "Americans" is that Europe, being made up of fifty countries with fifty different traditions, isn't at all homogeneous.  There's no reason to expect a Croatian to bid more like a Dutchman than an American.

Neither is America, made up of more than 50 states. Although it may well be more homogeneous than Europe is. Still you will get different answers to bidding polls in different areas of the country in many cases.

Uhm, in terms of anything bridge related North America is more homogeneous than Germany alone.

[Rev Dino]

hanp, on Jan 1 2010, 07:39 AM, said:

I am willing to bet that virtually all top Italian players would double with this hand, and most of them are European.

I can not agree that most of Italians are Europeans, but all of them.

I never said 2D is good I just said it seemed to me at the table the best. Taking serious Croatian forum or not is your personal choice, but you could keep it for yourself and it would be nicer. I found at this site whole bunch of a stupid things and I kept it for myself. I do not have in my mind to persuade people what to think about different European bridge sites.

I do not see much sense why it is important who did you talk to. MFA and Fluffy should be good if they are what you said, but OK, I should not be bad myself ranked high here and was captain of national team at last years European championships in France. I am not a pro but I finesse OK. And the people I spoke to here are certainly not basketball but a bridge players. The important thing is that the "bridge schools" are very different and that's the fact. Like in any other sport. Let say football: Italians - defense, Germans - stamina, Portugal - technique, English - long balls, French - atack...You still do not agree?

And asit is almost 01:00 a.m. I am sleepy. But I wll give you tommorow something else to show you how many different answers we will get on this forum. OK?

[bluecalm]

I am convinced 2D is the worst option.
My way to improve my intuition in such cases is :
a)listen to good players
b)run some simulations, go through hands and see what option fares the best.

All good players I talked to hate overcalling 2D on those hands.
I saw some sample hands and while it certainly may be variance my conclusion was that we are much more likely to lose very good club or heart fit than diamond fit after 2D overcall.
I would like to comment on style things. You can't go as far as saying that any decision with some alternatives is "style thing". Some things are simply better and some are worse. We won't ever improve if stop discussing if 2D is WORSE or BETTER than double saying it's "style thing" instead. Well if it is then some styles are worse than others.
I am more open minded about such things these days but still there is a line somewhere. I am pretty sure most my bridge friends would say 2D is insane/stupid/retarded if it weren't the public forum (we are young and like to exaggerate ). I don't see anything unreasonable about drawing the conclusion : "Croatian forum A voted for 2D" --->>>> "probably they are not as good as people here". It's simple bayesian reasoning. The more bad decisions one makes the more likely it is that he/is is bad at making decisions. I hate political corectness it's better to have honest heated debate than situation where everybody holds their views in the name of being nice.

My opinion is : "2D is bad" and "people who vote for 2D are probably not that good". I accept that I may be wrong and I may be convinced by strong arguments but for now it's the way I feel about the matter.

[gnasher]

bluecalm, on Jan 2 2010, 03:37 AM, said:

I saw some sample hands and while it certainly may be variance my conclusion was that we are much more likely to lose very good club or heart fit than diamond fit after 2D overcall.

What works on this hand isn't the only thing that matters.

If you double on this hand, you reduce your accuracy on the other hands where you make a takeout double. Auctions starting with a takeout double work better if advancer can expect the doubler to have at least two 4-card suits.

Similarly, if you bid 1NT on this hand, you reduce your accuracy on the other hands where you overcall 1NT. Auctions starting with a 1NT overcall work better if responder can expect a notrump-oriented hand.

[Jlall]

easiest double of the decade

[OleBerg]

I expected to be outnumbered when I voted for 2♦, but I didn't expect the bid to recieve such criticism. After all, it is the bid that caters best to 2♠ raise by LHO.

At MP's I don't hate 1NT.

[Rev Dino]

OleBerg, on Jan 2 2010, 05:15 AM, said:

but I didn't expect the bid to recieve such criticism.

Me neither. I just wanted to be socialized but I feel crucified at the public forum.

All from me for some time. HNY and be good.

[Fluffy]

5 card suit at the 2 level uhhggg

Bidding a 5 card suit at the 2 level must be your last resource, maybe with something such as

xxx
Kx
AQJxx
AKx

But certainly with AQxxx no!

NOTE: My views on the 2 level overcall are not standard

[Rev Dino]

Fluffy, on Jan 2 2010, 06:52 AM, said:

5 card suit at the 2 level uhhggg

Exactly, but it looks like people do not read those posts at all.

I never said 2D is good, and never said I still do, but that SEEMED to me at the table good. SEEMED, past tense. Much better players, not to say pros and champs bided even more stupid things at the table.

About 5 cards overcalls let me copy-paste what I wrote before:

"For 2D you are short for a card and will have problem to find possible heart fit." Dec 31, 05:37 a.m. forum time

[gnasher]

Rev Dino, on Jan 2 2010, 12:19 PM, said:

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

[pooltuna]

gnasher, on Jan 2 2010, 08:42 AM, said:

Rev Dino, on Jan 2 2010, 12:19 PM, said:

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

It's not that 2♦ is a "bad bid" just that the TOX is such a superior call that it makes 2♦ look bad relatively speaking.

[jdonn]

pooltuna, on Jan 2 2010, 09:33 AM, said:

gnasher, on Jan 2 2010, 08:42 AM, said:

Rev Dino, on Jan 2 2010, 12:19 PM, said:

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

It's not that 2♦ is a "bad bid" just that the TOX is such a superior call that it makes 2♦ look bad relatively speaking.

No it's specifically that 2♦ is bad. Danger is very high, upside is very low.

And oleberg who says 2♦ is best if they raise to 2♠? If partner has 5(+) hearts or clubs and 0-2 diamonds then double is best if they raise to 2♠.

I also don't see why he feels crucified. Does he just feel bad most people hate a 2♦ bid? Does he want people to not discuss any bid they think is bad?

[pooltuna]

jdonn, on Jan 2 2010, 11:32 AM, said:

pooltuna, on Jan 2 2010, 09:33 AM, said:

gnasher, on Jan 2 2010, 08:42 AM, said:

Rev Dino, on Jan 2 2010, 12:19 PM, said:

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

It's not that 2♦ is a "bad bid" just that the TOX is such a superior call that it makes 2♦ look bad relatively speaking.

No it's specifically that 2♦ is bad. Danger is very high, upside is very low.

And oleberg who says 2♦ is best if they raise to 2♠? If partner has 5(+) hearts or clubs and 0-2 diamonds then double is best if they raise to 2♠.

I also don't see why he feels crucified. Does he just feel bad most people hate a 2♦ bid? Does he want people to not discuss any bid they think is bad?

Nevertheless I choose to take the risk of 2♦when I hold

Kxx
A
AQxxx
Qxxx

presumably unlike you who now can no longer make a comfortable TOX and presumably chooses to pass?

[Codo]

gnasher, on Jan 2 2010, 10:42 PM, said:

Rev Dino, on Jan 2 2010, 12:19 PM, said:

I feel crucified at the public forum.

I don't know why you feel that. Nobody criticised you personally. Many people criticised a 2♦ overcall on this hand, but that's because they think 2♦ is a bad bid.

Maybe not personally, but if Han writes that you should not take the Croatian mailing list too serious and you are the captain of the Croatian team, you can take this quite serious.

If you choose 2 ♦ and you are not used to the bad style on this forum and read the words which expressed their opinions about this bid, you may feal criticised too.

It is a fact that most people here write as if their opinion is a dogmatic fact. If you are not used to this style, this can be very insulting.