BBO Discussion Forums: Responding to partner's suit overcall - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1

Responding to partner's suit overcall

#1 User is offline   Liversidge 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 424
  • Joined: 2014-January-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sleaford, Lincolnshire
  • Interests:Bridge, Gardening, DIY, Travel

Posted 2019-November-26, 13:40

Help please!

from what I can piece together from different sources, it seems to me that in the UK we are in the middle of a transition when it comes to competitive bidding. In 2017 the EBU's teaching wing, EBED made a policy decision to switch from Strong 2's to weak 2's for beginner classes. Andrew Robson gave up teaching Strong 2's years ago and also teaches 'bidding to the level of the fit' when responding to partner's overcall, so, making a jump raise with 4 card support, a double jump with 5 card support, even if very weak. The UCB shows a good raise or better with 3+ card support.
My Klinger/Kambites book - Understanding the Contested Auction, adopts the same approach. But the latest EBED Acol system file that I can find (2017) states that when responding to partner's overcall you should "Raise the overcall on the same values as you would raise an opening bid".with no mention of bidding to the level of the fit.

Thinking this might be a 'UK transitional thing' that was still working it's way through, I checked the ACBL teaching manual - Bidding in the 21st Century', and it says much the same as EBED: “So, with a minimum hand, 8 or 9 total points, you will raise overcaller’s suit with support or bid a new suit at the one-level with no support and a good five-card suit of your own.".

To get another take on it I constructed some hands to test on the Jack computer software. I set my convention card to "aggressive support bids, and the UCB" when responding to partner's overcall, and Jack raised a 1 overcall to just 2 with 5 hearts and a singleton in the opening suit, and 4 HCP. When I reduced the HCP to 3 HCP Jack passed (still with 5 hearts). So Jack does not appear to be following the 'bidding to the level of the fit' principle either when responding to partner's overcall.

When it comes to jump overcalls, the UK has been gradually shifting from strong to intermediate to weak. Strong is still played in some clubs, intermediate is the EBED standard for beginners, but weak is coming up fast, as more and more players switch to Weak 2s. Most handouts on making jump overcalls explain the differences between the three styles, and how you cover the full range from 7 HCP up to 20+ with each of them, with pros and cons, so you can take your choice, but when it comes to responding to an overcall, I can't find anything similar. I am genuinely confused, and am wondering if maybe there are two competing styles in popular use when it comes to responding to overcalls. In one style ('bidding to the level of the fit') maybe the partnership is adopting a 100% spoiling approach with direct raises, with the UCB being the only way to make a constructive bid, and maybe the other style is semi-constructive, trying to ride two horses, though I am not sure how that helps overcaller. As I understand it, the former stems from the Law of Total Tricks, and if it's right for responding to weak 2s, why is it not also right for responding to partners overcall?
0

#2 User is offline   FelicityR 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 980
  • Joined: 2012-October-26
  • Gender:Female

Posted 2019-November-26, 14:44

My view - for what it's worth - is always raise to the level of the fit (Law of Total Tricks) if partner overcalls, except if you are at unfavourably vulnerability, where the overall shape of the hand might dictate whether a slight adjustment of -1.

As partner has overcalled the likelihood is that his/her hand is weaker than the opener, so I want to obstruct the opponents as effectively as possible.
0

#3 User is offline   ahydra 

  • AQT92 AQ --- QJ6532
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,840
  • Joined: 2009-September-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wellington, NZ

Posted 2019-November-26, 17:03

My style is pretty close to LOTT and perhaps considered conservative in the modern game:

raise to 2 = 3 cards, something like 4-9 HCP. Can be 4 cards if the hand doesn't look great, e.g. 4333 or too weak for a mixed raise.
raise to 3 = mixed raise: 4 cards, something like 7-9 HCP, rarely 4333. Can be 5 cards if 5332/5422 (or at unfavourable vul where 4MX rates to be too pricey).
raise to 4 = 4 cards with lots of extra shape; or 5+ cards, normally with shortage.
UCB = 3+ cards, 9+ HCP.
New suit = F1 by UPH. Normally 5 cards but can be 4 at the one-level.
Jump new suit = fit jump or splinter depending on agreements

A lot of experts move the mixed raise into a jump-cue e.g. (1D)-1H-(1S)-3D, and the raise to 3 is now much more like what you describe, LOTT on fit but perhaps only 2-6 points.

These kind of approaches - splitting out the mixed raises, and possibly other inventions such as transfer advances (so you can differentiate between a "bad" and a "good" raise to 2) - allow you to pre-empt effectively while still limiting the range of advancer's hand such that overcaller has some idea if game is possible or not. With opening bids getting ever lighter you do need both!

On a side note, I'd suggest throwing away any teaching resources that use "total points". :) There is no substitute for visualisation.

ahydra
0

#4 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,068
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2019-November-26, 17:27

The single raise can cover some ground as partner can still make game tries, so something like 3-8 points is maybe reasonable. With extra shape/length but too weak for a jump raise, you can do it on zero hcps as the extra shape/length compensates.

The jump raise has to be more tightly defined. Agree for example 3-5 points with 4-card support and a small doubleton (a bit less with a singleton, obv), the better hands (so-called mixed raises) can jump in opps' suit. If opps suit still leaves one or two step below your 3-level, as in (1)-1)-(p)-3, the mixed raise can over a wide range, say 6+ with 4-card support and a small doubleton.

Note that if all cuebids promise support, you need to have a way to show strong hands without a fit. This doesn't come up so often (and by a passed hand it obviously never comes up) so don't make it too complicated. But a reasonable agreement is that a new suit is constructive but nonforcing (say 9-15 points or so), the game forcing hands without a fit make a jump shift. So jump shifts are not fitted, splinters, weak or anything like that, just old-fashioned strong GF. Unless you play forcing simple shifts, of course.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#5 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,666
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2019-December-03, 19:45

While non-forcing changes of suit are gaining in popularity, I think it is still the norm in the UK to play changes of suit forcing, raises competitive and the cue as promising support and limit raise strength or better. NT advances are often described as bidding one level less than over an opening bid, which equates more or less to 3 points stronger. I think the more popular way of playing jump bids in a new suit is as fit jumps. Whether double jumps are also fit jumps or switch to being splinters is more controversial, though a double jump cue is always a splinter. A single jump cue is another call with no real standard though, so be careful with that (unless you want to dissolve the partnership).

As far as history goes, I was playing competitive raises and the UCB as a beginner in the 80s and it was already standard in teaching material at that time. I suspect there is a misreading of the Acol system file here and they mean that the strength for a simple raise of an overcall is similar to a simple raise of an opening bid and so is the limit raise strength, just with the difference as to how the limit raise is shown. Are you sure here that there is not some additional comment about jump raises being competitive or preemptive? I am sure the last EBU system file I read had such a statement and I would be surprised if it was removed.

Finally, there are indeed two (actually more than two but most are not NB-friendly) competing methods for responding to overcalls but the difference does not relate to raises, which are always competitive besides between very poor players who do not know better. The real system difference can be seen in Helene's post where she mentions non-forcing changes of suit. In some parts of the world that method of advancing overcalls is standard, so it is not surprising that they have been imported to the UK. They do have some advantages sometimes too although I am personally not a huge fan. Probably better than either is a system of advances based on transfers but that is moving into the advanced material, so beyond mentioning that the possibility exists, it is best not to go into that any further.

In any case, no need to be confused here. You are raising to the level of fit so you are doing it right. Whatever sources you are reading beyond that are probably either misunderstandings, offering nuances designed for advanced players or just plain wrong. In the case of the EBU file, my money is strongly on the first of these.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#6 User is offline   Tramticket 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,070
  • Joined: 2009-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent (Near London)

Posted 2019-December-04, 08:49

View PostLiversidge, on 2019-November-26, 13:40, said:

But the latest EBED Acol system file that I can find (2017) states that when responding to partner's overcall you should "Raise the overcall on the same values as you would raise an opening bid".with no mention of bidding to the level of the fit.


There appear to be two documents that I can find on the EBU website: (1) Foundation Level System File - this appears to show systems that should be taught to complete beginners (I found a 2019 version) and (2) Level 2 System File - this seems to be a follow on system for use by learners who have progressed beyond the level of a complete beginner (I found a 2014 version).

The foundation level statement on responding to overcalls is consistent with your quote:

Quote

Responding to an overcall
Supporting partner is very straightforward. As the overcaller should have a good suit there is no need to strain to find an alternative place to play. You can raise the overcall whenever you have 3-card support. Raise the overcall on the same values as you would raise an opening bid.


But the level 2 system card takes it a bit further:

Quote

1.2 Responding to an overcall
1.2.1 Supporting partner is very straightforward. As the overcaller should have a good suit there is no need to strain to find an alternative place to play. You can raise the overcall whenever you have 3-card support. Raise the overcall on the same values as you would raise an opening bid. A double or triple raise is mainly pre-emptive.
1.2.2 With a genuine interest in game bid the opponents’ suit, known as an unassuming cue bid. This shows 3+ card support for partner and game try values, say 10+ HCP. With a minimum overcall partner repeats his suit at a minimum level, with a better hand he shows some other feature.


Whilst this wording is not ideal - it does suggest that direct raises are preemptive and a cue-bid should be used with game interest.

The concept of bidding to the level of fit (which derives partly from the Law of Total Tricks) is a useful method of evaluating a hand with support for partner But like other hand evaluation methods (e.g. Point Counting, Losing Trick Count), this should be used as a guide rather than as a gospel. I am particularly careful when both vulnerable for example, but the quality of the trump suit any secondary fits, defensive values in their suits and many other factors mightcause me to adjust this evaluation metric.
0

#7 User is offline   AL78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,962
  • Joined: 2019-October-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE England
  • Interests:Bridge, hiking, cycling, gardening, weight training

Posted 2019-December-17, 16:52

The way I teach beginners is as follows:

Direct raises are non-forcing and are competing the part score, and/or trying to shut the opponents out. As already mentioned, bidding to the level of the fit. If you are red against green, exercise caution.

Changes of suit are forcing and show a decent suit.

Cue bidding the opponents suit ahows a constructive raise, game invitational or better.

NT responses are analogous to responding to an opening bid, with the addition of a stop in the opponents suit. Since a 1 level overcall can be up to a king lighter than a 1 level suit opening, responding in NT is about a king more (i.e. 1-level overcall: 9-12 1NT, 13-15 2NT, opposite a two level overcall which will be a near opening hand at worst, shade these by 2-3 HCP).

The problem hand is where you have enough in HCP strength to invite or go to game, no immediate support for partner, no good suit to bid, and no stop in the opponents suit. You will have to improvise here, say, use the unassuming cue bid and hope partner can do something useful like bid NT, otherwise you have to use initiative.

Some people add things like fit jumps, jump bidding in a new suit showing support, values and a good side suit (five with 2/3 top honors, for example).
0

Page 1 of 1


Fast Reply

  

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users