[MickyB]

Because we believe that it will get you to a worse 3m contract more often than it will get you to a better 3m contract, and that it could be important to have 2♠ played from our side.

[han]

This is a great thread, I really enjoyed reading all the comments.

I'm not convinced by the passers. Are they really saying that partner should balance on almost anything, even when vulnerable holding a balanced 6-count and 3 hearts? If so, isn't that strategy almost (if not more) dangerous than bidding here?

I do not beleive in true OBAR bidding at IMPs, but I do overcall more aggressively when the opponents bid and raise, and my regular partners know that. They also know that I try to bid when I'm short in the opponents' suit and have something, so that they don't have to balance with length and little strength.

The doublers seem to think that a double will land you more often in a fit than 2S will. As they are better players than I am, they are doubtlessly right, but this is counter-intuitive for me. Partner won't bid 2S holding a 3244 shape, (or will he?), and certainly not holding 2344. True, with that last hand you have no fit, but I'd rather be in a 5-2 fit at the 2-level than in a 4-3 fit at the 3-level. And when you have fits in spades as well as in a minor, I'd want to play in 2S too!

[luke warm]

MickyB, on Mar 24 2005, 06:53 AM, said:

Because we believe that it will get you to a worse 3m contract more often than it will get you to a better 3m contract, and that it could be important to have 2♠ played from our side.

first of all, i didn't say that 2S is a bad bid... i only thought double was more flexible, given a bid in the first place... now then, looking at the hands ben posted i'm not sure you get in worse 3m contracts any more often (and i think less often) than you would in 2S contracts

that's just my view