[ArtK78]

When I first learned this game (38 years ago, yikes!) I learned that the upper limit of an overcall was about 15 HCP. With more, one doubled first and then made another call.

Over the years, the upper limit of overcalls has increased. Some time ago, playing in the GNT opening round at the nationals, I doubled a 1♥ opening bid with a 19 count and a club suit, but no spades. My partner, Dave Treadwell, told me he thought my bid was terrible, and that overcalling 2♣ was clear because of the spade shortage.

I bring this hand up to show how far we have come from an automatic double when holding more than 15 HCP, not the wisdom of my double vs. overcalling 2♣. One of my opponents (a well known player on the national scene) thought that my double was clear. So opinions certainly differ.

I would overcall 1♥ on the hand in the OP. I would be shocked if my overcall ended the auction. The overcall should make subsequent bidding easier than if we doubled first.

[bd71]

Here's a request for those overcalling 1H on this hand...for this auction/vulnerability, please give sample hands for both the "lightest" and the "heaviest" 1H overcall you would make.

For example, on the light end, would you try a lead-directing overcall with xxx AKxxx xx xx?

On the heavy end, is the OP hand it? Or are their stronger hands you would still overcall 1H with (pace Fluffy) and what's a good example?

I'm just trying to get a feel for what your bookends are...because it seems like there must be light-years of space in between.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

1H.

#1 I would overcall 1H with xxx AKxxx xx xxx

#2 The original is certainly near max for a 1H overcall, move the non hearts
honor to concentrate in a suit, exchange with Aces / Kings, than X will get
more attractive.
In the end, if you decide to X with a 1-suiter, you need to be willing to later
introduce your suit at any sensible level, this means up to game level.
I would be ok with bidding 3H next round with the given hand, but would not
like to bid 4H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[hanp]

bd71, on Sep 10 2010, 09:23 AM, said:

Here's a request for those overcalling 1H on this hand...for this auction/vulnerability, please give sample hands for both the "lightest" and the "heaviest" 1H overcall you would make.

For example, on the light end, would you try a lead-directing overcall with xxx AKxxx xx xx?

If you give me another card I will overcall every day of the weak.

Quote

On the heavy end, is the OP hand it?  Or are their stronger hands you would still overcall 1H with (pace Fluffy) and what's a good example?

I'm just trying to get a feel for what your bookends are...because it seems like there must be light-years of space in between.

There seems to be some confusion about the OP hand. The truth is, the hand is just not that good. I can give you 16-counts with which I would double, especially with spades where there is less of a risk to be preempted.

After overcalling 1H we'll be better placed if the opponents bid more, and at least as well if partner bids. If 1H gets passed out the chance that we have missed game is very small, I'd be delighted to play 1H. I simply don't see what bad can come of overcalling 1H with this hand.

(Of course it is clear that overcalling on balanced 7-counts can lead to soemthing bad. There I do it because I think more often it will lead to something good.)

[gwnn]

bd71, on Sep 10 2010, 02:23 PM, said:

Here's a request for those overcalling 1H on this hand...for this auction/vulnerability, please give sample hands for both the "lightest" and the "heaviest" 1H overcall you would make.

For example, on the light end, would you try a lead-directing overcall with xxx AKxxx xx xx?

On the heavy end, is the OP hand it? Or are their stronger hands you would still overcall 1H with (pace Fluffy) and what's a good example?

I'm just trying to get a feel for what your bookends are...because it seems like there must be light-years of space in between.

Huh, I can't afford to wait for perfect hands with AKxxx in my suit. I didn't buy in the tournament to pass and pass and pass.

Qxx KQxxx xxx xx is fine.

On the other end of the spectrum I'd overcall 1♥ with

KJ
AQJxxx
KJx
Kx

or so.

Now the diamonds are starting to look good as well but still the doubleton spade makes me unhappy.

6322 is not a very good shape. 6421 is about a million times better than 6322. Also 7321 is in another league to 6322.

[bluecalm]

My preference is to double but I think it's close and 1♥ certainly ok.
Not much to say about it. It's good if partner knows what to expect.

[JLOGIC]

gwnn, on Sep 10 2010, 12:15 PM, said:

On the other end of the spectrum I'd overcall 1♥ with

KJ
AQJxxx
KJx
Kx

or so.

What? That is absurd. I don't even understand the point of this, just to miss a game sometimes? Or to have to overbid later in the auction in order to catch up, and get too high opposite a zero count?

hanp said:

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

I've seen some good arguments that this should be NF and weak. I definitely think 2 of a minor should be non forcing fwiw.

[aguahombre]

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 02:08 PM, said:

gwnn, on Sep 10 2010, 12:15 PM, said:

On the other end of the spectrum I'd overcall 1♥ with

KJ
AQJxxx
KJx
Kx

or so.

What? That is absurd. I don't even understand the point of this, just to miss a game sometimes? Or to have to overbid later in the auction in order to catch up, and get too high opposite a zero count?

That one is beyond almost everyone's maximum....even Woolsey's, I think. I have seen him advocate some awsome 2-level overcalls, though.

[gwnn]

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 08:08 PM, said:

What? That is absurd. I don't even understand the point of this, just to miss a game sometimes? Or to have to overbid later in the auction in order to catch up, and get too high opposite a zero count?

That sounds a little bit of an overreaction, I changed QJx to KJx and it went from a good maximum 1♥ to a hand where 1♥ is absurd and incomprehensible? I guess I would also double there but maybe not with Kxx in diamonds, I am not sure about it, I don't have a good rule/scientific method of sorting them out. Would you still have been so disgusted if my example hand was with Kxx of diamonds? Just wondering (I know that QJx to KJx or even Kxx is a big upgrade; in both cases we usually take 1 more trick and they will get a ruff much less often - but still)

[Phil]

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 03:08 PM, said:

hanp said:

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

I've seen some good arguments that this should be NF and weak. I definitely think 2 of a minor should be non forcing fwiw.

I thought this was standard?

[Rodney26]

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 03:08 PM, said:

hanp said:

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

I've seen some good arguments that this should be NF and weak. I definitely think 2 of a minor should be non forcing fwiw.

He's probably suggesting starting with a double and bidding 2♥, although you probably recognize that and are suggesting methods where weak takeout should be able to pick a major over 1NT might make sense.

He is right that 1♥ followed by 1NT, as I suggested, is ridiculous. The hand is too good. I posted too quickly.

I like driving the hand to NT regardless of the sixth heart when partner bids NT. Losing four tricks to a diamond stiff and two aces on your right seems way too likely. I'm not sure what han wants to hear from partner to want to play 4♥ over 3NT. Whether I start with x or 1♥, 3NT is my call over 1NT in both cases.

[Phil]

Rodney26, on Sep 10 2010, 03:37 PM, said:

He's probably suggesting starting with a double and bidding 2♥, although you probably recognize that and are suggesting methods where weak takeout should be able to pick a major over 1NT might make sense.

No, if I'm 4-4 in the majors I will sit for 1N usually. But you are correct I was referring to x - p - 1N - p - 2♥.

I'm inferring Han is as well.

[JLOGIC]

gwnn, on Sep 10 2010, 03:29 PM, said:

That sounds a little bit of an overreaction, I changed QJx to KJx and it went from a good maximum 1♥ to a hand where 1♥ is absurd and incomprehensible?

It's really not, you made the hand much more than 1 point better than the previous hand (surely you see that KJx is not only 1 more HCP than QJx, but with RHO opening 1D it is often 2 tricks instead of 1, 2 stoppers instead of 1, and something that is not as likely to get ruffed out by LHO in 4H if they have xx and RHO has the other 2 honors etc etc).

Lets say you made the hand 1.75 points stronger in playing strength. That is the equivalent of going from opening 1N with a good 17 to an average 19 or something. The first is whatever, the 2nd is really bad.

Kxx vs QJx you have not changed the point count at all, you have just made the hand have better points, in that case it would be enough for me to double but no it's not really that much of a change.

I have never really understood the argument of "if I only add one point to a hand, how can your opinion change so much about it?" one point is a lot, everything is based on points and one point always changes things. In this case though you are really not appreciating the difference of KJx vs QJx in RHOs suit imo, it is much more than one point.

[hanp]

Rodney26, on Sep 10 2010, 03:37 PM, said:

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 03:08 PM, said:

hanp said:

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

I've seen some good arguments that this should be NF and weak. I definitely think 2 of a minor should be non forcing fwiw.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that and I don't play that with anybody but I liked the arguments!

[JLOGIC]

Rodney26, on Sep 10 2010, 03:37 PM, said:

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 03:08 PM, said:

hanp said:

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

I've seen some good arguments that this should be NF and weak. I definitely think 2 of a minor should be non forcing fwiw.

He's probably suggesting starting with a double and bidding 2♥, although you probably recognize that and are suggesting methods where weak takeout should be able to pick a major over 1NT might make sense.

He is right that 1♥ followed by 1NT, as I suggested, is ridiculous. The hand is too good. I posted too quickly.

I like driving the hand to NT regardless of the sixth heart when partner bids NT. Losing four tricks to a diamond stiff and two aces on your right seems way too likely. I'm not sure what han wants to hear from partner to want to play 4♥ over 3NT. Whether I start with x or 1♥, 3NT is my call over 1NT in both cases.

Since a double + suit is a game force opposite a 1N bid (as it shows values), you really don't need all the room you have on:

(1D) X p 1N
p 2H

It is a little better on slam hands (unlikely though), and a little better on choice of games hands (but marginal) than cuebidding and bidding hearts or jumping to 3H.

Since you "know" 1N is the wrong spot if you have a 4504 10 count, you might play that 2H shows that.

I almost always overcall 1M with 5 though, so I don't think the treatment is that useful. However I think

1D X p 1N
p 2C

or

1S X p 1N
p 2C

as non forcing is very useful, since I will frequently double with bad/min hands and spade voids and 5 card minors. Heck I might even have 1345 and want to bail out of 1N, I know my partner probably fits a minor somewhere since he usually doesn't have 4 hearts (yeah he may be 5332, oh well, 2C still could be better).

So there I think you gain a lot of utility from playing 2 of a minor as non forcing.

[hanp]

Phil, on Sep 10 2010, 03:33 PM, said:

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 03:08 PM, said:

hanp said:

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

I've seen some good arguments that this should be NF and weak. I definitely think 2 of a minor should be non forcing fwiw.

I thought this was standard?

You are right, I forgot that Audrey Grant just included it into her new book.

[bluecalm]

Quote

And if partner bids 1NT I would bid 2H, we can always get back to 3NT later.

Quote

I thought this was standard?

Just to clarify, you guys are talking about:

1m - X - pass - 1NT
pass 2♥

right ?

If yes I think it's matter of agreements. Where I play people don't play ELC at all so this is strong and GF but I saw some awesome players bidding 3♥ her with quite average 16's. I guess 2♥ would be 5H-4S for them and weakish.
My guess about standard is that it's not standard though

[hanp]

I was going to post that equal level conversion has nothing to do with it, but of course it does. After all, all bridge conventions form one big loving family.

[Rodney26]

Phil, on Sep 10 2010, 03:48 PM, said:

Rodney26, on Sep 10 2010, 03:37 PM, said:

He's probably suggesting starting with a double and bidding 2♥, although you probably recognize that and are suggesting methods where weak takeout should be able to pick a major over 1NT might make sense.

No, if I'm 4-4 in the majors I will sit for 1N usually. But you are correct I was referring to x - p - 1N - p - 2♥.

I'm inferring Han is as well.

I don't think 4-4's would ever bid on Phil. 1NT should steer us away from that. Something like:

♠AK74
♥T87532
♦9
♣A4

I'm guessing there are pairs that want to play 2H after 1NT by advancer as showing something like this, and 3H shows the moose and is forcing. Others might opt for different stylistic approaches (such as 1♥ to start).

I think Justin's post makes a lot of sense (as pretty much always).

[bluecalm]

Quote

I was going to post that equal level conversion has nothing to do with it, but of course it does. After all, all bridge conventions form one big loving family.

Haha, right. It's not "equal level" afterall and but the idea is similar enough I think