[Chamaco]

hotShot, on Jul 28 2005, 11:00 AM, said:

dbl after an agreed fit, should be penalty, East holds ace of trump which is the savest trick, now west will have to produce 4 tricks to prove his bid right.

1) East should not run, so 4♦ is very bad.
2) dbl is lunatic, because you'll need lots of luck to get 3 tricks in ♥ and Q♠ and you still need partner to bring an additional trick.

DBL by a hand which simply overcalled at the previous round cannot be pure penalty.
The fact that the overcaller did not double at his first turn limits his hand to, say, 16 hcp , maybe 17.

The double by the 2D bidder is cardshowing: it should show a maximum 2D overcall (which I do not think he has: he has a good 14 hcp hand, but overcalling at the 2 level with less would be crazy, so he has already shown his values).
Pard is allowed to exert judgment and pull or pass according to his hand-type.

So the double is, IMO, much worse than the pulling: when west doubles, west sees only one trick in hand; is he supposed to play the 2D bidder for 4 tricks, to defeat 3S, at IMPS, risking doubling them into game ?

No thanks, I think the double, at IMPS, was ridiculous.
At IMPS you double a partscore when you expect to defeat it by 2+ tricks, the doubler here could not be sure of this: he might xpect to set the contract maybe by 1 trick, but then again the cost/benefit was against odds.

[coyot]

P_Marlowe, on Jul 28 2005, 07:30 AM, said:

But playing IMP's I dont care, if they double 3D and it goes -1
for 200, because most of the time they will sweat blood and
water, because 3DX= is a real nice score to bring back.

Playing MP, you are right, but then the stress for the opponents
will be also great, and sometimes, they do not get the defence right.

With kind reards
Marlowe

Well, I do care

In fact, at MPs I would dare the 3♦ more often than at IMPs, because there gain vs. loss ratio is good (some chance they overbid, some chance they don't double or misdefend), but at IMPs, I play my bids by the book. I will NOT risk -200 or -500 unless I am sure that the defense will be very incompetent.

In the partscore battle, with opps not being stupid, the risk of -500 when cards lie badly for us is too big, because most of the field is likely to play 3♠+1 (not knowing about the good lie of cards while bidding).

To helene_t: If 2♦ promises a 6card (that is, partner is ready to accept the blame with 5card), this is a LOTT no-brainer, of course. But if the overcall is more often 5card than 6card, 3♦ is against LOTT.

[Blofeld]

The 3♦ bid is the only one in the auction that I actually like. The spade shortage along with the three card support give you enough for a competitive raise, I think. I'm reasonably happy at the three level even if partner has only five diamonds, and if six then passing now may let the opponents steal the auction at too low a level.

Given the yucky 2♦ bid, I don't mind the double that much (I'm assuming it's penalties as a fit has been found), but I don't think that I'd make it. I don't like 4♦ at all.

---

coyot: 3♦ doesn't really seem anti-LOTT even with a 5 card suit opposite.
Assuming we have an 8 card fit, they rate to have an 8 or 9 card fit. So to begin with we think that there are 16 or 17 total tricks available. But the singleton ♠ is a bonus, inclining us to a slightly higher estimate of the total tricks available (the fact that it is the Ace is more or less LOTT-neutral, I think), so 16+ to 17+.

If there are 16 total, which looks like the worst case, then if 2♠ is making, 3♦ is one off. So a bad score if they double. But people are wary of doubling you into game on borderline cases at IMPs. If 2♠ is one off, then 3♦ is making, which is a good result as we're not going to be able to double 2♠ (even better if they decided to double us!). If they're making 9 tricks, then we're just making 7 and things look a little more grim.

If there are 17 total, then passing 2♠ could be exhanging +110 for -110. If they're split other than 9/8 for us and them, then it doesn't make much difference.

And of course even if partner usually has just five, a reasonable amount of the time there will be more. Which may lead to 18 or more total trumps, and make it even more imperative to act. Partner won't bid again on his six card suit, so you'd better mention your support now.

[bearmum]

[coyot]

bearmum, on Jul 28 2005, 10:00 AM, said:

rating
2♦ 5 OK for overcall
3♦ MINUS 5! ( trumps /points insufficient at THIS vul)
X MINUS 10 ( where are 5 tricks coming from?)
4♦ 0 (all he could do after partnership's horrible bidding up to this point)

I'm not saying that 2♦ and x are equally good bids, but, if the doubling hand expects to score 3 hearts and 0.5 spade trick, it needs 1.5 tricks from partner,
but the same hand bids 2♦, when it can expect 6 tricks? (3♥ and with some luck 3♦, thus requiring 2 tricks from partner?

I would rate the 2♦ overcall as minus 5 as well, definitely not OK.
(the [3DI] that gets minus 5 from you expects a little more offense-oriented hand, likely 6card at this vul )

[Walddk]

Quote: The worst bid by EW was...

One option missing in the poll: "All of them".

That gets my vote. The rest will get -99 (I give them 1 point for "artistic impression").

Roland

[Winstonm]

2D-1
3D-4
Dble-0
4D-0

2D: Bad minor suits in bad hands with bad shape don't make good bids. The one question to be able to answer before overcalling is: why am I making this bid?
Because I have 5 so-so diamonds and a cruddy 14 count is not sufficient reason. Where does West expect this hand to go that could not be reached also after a pass ? I assigned a 1 because it is just barely possible that if lucky West could catch East on a magic hand that produces a game that could not be reached otherwise - but bridge is not about finding magic but about consistency.

3D: I have some sympathy for this bid as East is entitled to believe a better hand for diamond play is opposite; however, I would much prefer 4-card support with such a weak hand.

Dble: Three (maybe) heart tricks and the guesswork out of spades. About as bad as it gets. This may be the kind of double that works at matchpoints, but it is suicide at imps.

4D: This is a total horror. A spade trick that partner knows nothing about and fewer diamonds than might be the case does not equal a runout - I suspect East has seen West's doubles before and panicked. Little did he know they were going to get lucky this time.

3S by South: This is silly. If anyone needs to bid 3S it is North. South has no more or less than announced with the opening bid and no reason to think 3S is correct. North has the tougher decision with the bad shape, bad diamond holding, but 4 trump. Ugh. Tough decision.

The normal imp result here would most likely be 3S down 1. Back to the first argument: Would not this contract also be reached after:
1S-P -2S-P
P-3D?

And now East has no reason to do anything other than pass.

Winston

[flytoox]

Winstonm, on Jul 28 2005, 03:44 PM, said:

Back to the first argument: Would not this contract also be reached after:
1S-P -2S-P
P-3D?

And now East has no reason to do anything other than pass.

Winston

Pass then come in at 3 level is even worse than 2D. Now they exchange enough infomation and will dbl you if they want, or bid 3S.

[luis]

2♦: 7/10 I think it's quite reasonable, lot of people that object this bid will bid it at the table, hard to resist overcalling 2♦ when you have a good hand with diamonds.

3♦: 0/10 With xxx and no useful cards at all knowing it's probably not your hand there's no need to get pd excited, supporting with xxx has always been in my list of things that usually turn out badly.

X: 7/10 Again a reasonable bid, overcalled has some extras and pd has supported, this can be a cold 3NT game or maybe a diamond game, if the 3d bidder has very little we can settle for 4♦

4♦: No opinion since this was forced by the horrible 3♦ bid.

[Winstonm]

flytoox, on Jul 28 2005, 10:46 AM, said:

Winstonm, on Jul 28 2005, 03:44 PM, said:

Back to the first argument: Would not this contract also be reached after:
1S-P -2S-P
P-3D?

And now East has no reason to do anything other than pass.

Winston

Pass then come in at 3 level is even worse than 2D. Now they exchange enough infomation and will dbl you if they want, or bid 3S.

1S-P-2S-P
P-P.

I am looking at two limited hands that thought chances of game so unlikely that they stopped in 2S. With the given hand West hand, I would just as soon play 2S at imps. But the point is that an immediate 2D with a bad hand and bad suit is much more dangerous than the balance: now you have an unlimited hand behind you with no announced fit for spades. If this is the opponent's hand, the 2D bid has just given them the option of either taking their sizeable penalty when it is right or ignoring you and bidding their game anyway.

I do agree that this hand is not a good balancing hand. But it's a worse overcall.

Winston

[mikeh]

I voted for double as the worst call. It is truly a partner-hanging bid.

The hand is too weak to play for penalties... would it be shocking to see a high ♠ in dummy, or for only 2 of the ♥ to cash, and so on?

It is utterly the wrong hand for a competitive double.

So whatever West meant and however he thought east should/would take it, he doesn't have the hand for the call.

As for the other bids, none of them stand out. They are all dubious.

2♦: not a bid I would perpetrate. The suit is short and weak. The ♠ suit is only a fraction better than the absolute worst holding imaginable.

3♦ is the kind of raise you make when playing with a partner who has his values for 2♦... which this partner did not. If east is familiar with his partner's style, then 3♦ was wrong. If he wasn't then 3♦ is acceptable. BTW, if ew play transfer advances (2N is transfer to 3♣), 3♦ becomes 'safe' because it denies a constructive raise.

4♦: I feel for east who must have sensed that he was being asked to choose between two zeros!

[coyot]

luis, on Jul 28 2005, 10:54 AM, said:

2♦: 7/10 I think it's quite reasonable, lot of people that object this bid will bid it at the table, hard to resist overcalling 2♦ when you have a good hand with diamonds.

3♦: 0/10 With xxx and no useful cards at all knowing it's probably not your hand there's no need to get pd excited, supporting with xxx has always been in my list of things that usually turn out badly.

X: 7/10 Again a reasonable bid, overcalled has some extras and pd has supported, this can be a cold 3NT game or maybe a diamond game, if the 3d bidder has very little we can settle for 4♦

4♦: No opinion since this was forced by the horrible 3♦ bid.

Luis, how can you be such an idiot?

JUST KIDDING :-)))

But seriously, this is NOT a GOOD hand with diamonds, is it?

I can paint you a ton of good hands with diamonds that will contain 14 HCP, some of the m will even NOT need 6 diamonds, but you can bet that QJxxx with 5332 and Qxx in opener's suit is NOT one of those.

Against majority of 2♦ overcalls, 3♦ would not be a bad bid. The chance for spade ruff or two is pretty good. (Only if opps lead a trump and overcaller has no side entries, he will not get his spade ruffs.).

Double of 3 spades? If I were to accept the 2♦ overcall as a good hand, I can't possibly find anything EXTRA in it.

Winstonm:
Reopening 2♠ with this garbage is suicide.

I would agree with either a straight takeout double (most likely ending in 2♥ in misfit or opps playing 2♠, or a pass.

I know that it is a hard task to pass with 14HCP, BUT, if you pass with this hand,
you can be sure that your p will reopen 1♠ should it be passed to him. If your LHO bids 1NT and this gets passed to you, 2♦ is a good reopen - because your partner will know that you have a marginal hand (because you reopened in a case where the fit is not guaranteed).

So, I would vote for DBL or PASS as first action with this hand (DBL for sure if the black queen moves into clubs) - and then reopening if possible on 2nd level.

[luis]

coyot, on Jul 28 2005, 04:36 PM, said:

Luis, how can you be such an idiot?
JUST KIDDING :-)))
But seriously, this is NOT a GOOD hand with diamonds, is it?

I can paint you a ton of good hands with diamonds that will contain 14 HCP, some of the m will even NOT need 6 diamonds, but you can bet that QJxxx with 5332 and Qxx in opener's suit is NOT one of those.

Against majority of 2♦ overcalls, 3♦ would not be a bad bid. The chance for spade ruff or two is pretty good. (Only if opps lead a trump and overcaller has no side entries, he will not get his spade ruffs.).

Double of 3 spades? If I were to accept the 2♦ overcall as a good hand, I can't possibly find anything EXTRA in it.

Hi coyot,

As my pd said once, "I have no problem playing with an idiot but you don't need to go for a world record" :-)

From a theory point of view I can destroy the 2♦ overcall as many posters did, from a practice point of view can you really blame this guy for bidding 2♦? I don't think so.
My style says that my partnership likes overcalling and we somehow relax some requirements to overcall that's why we don't punish pd for overcalling, 3♦ is really horrible.

If you overcall light and pd bids 3♦ when he should then the double is also logical, in some contexts you may win 3NT.
It all depends on style, I feel my style has more in common with the 2♦ overcaller and I would defend him in an argument with the 3♦ bidder. Let's be practical, 2♦ may or may not be right but caused no harm, on the other hand 3♦ started all the problems.

[Walddk]

luis, on Jul 28 2005, 06:54 PM, said:

Let's be practical, 2♦ may or may not be right but caused no harm, on the other hand 3♦ started all the problems.

The 2♦ overcall actually started all the problems in my opinion. As his partner I, naively perhaps, expect that he has something when he ventures an overcall at the 2-level vulnerable.

High cards alone don't win any tricks for your side on offence. Long, strong suits do.

Roland

[luis]

Walddk, on Jul 28 2005, 05:51 PM, said:

luis, on Jul 28 2005, 06:54 PM, said:

Let's be practical, 2♦ may or may not be right but caused no harm, on the other hand 3♦ started all the problems.

The 2♦ overcall actually started all the problems in my opinion. As his partner I, naively perhaps, expect that he has something when he ventures an overcall at the 2-level vulnerable.

High cards alone don't win any tricks for your side on offence. Long, strong suits do.

Roland

Well we can agree to disagree on this one :-)
Even if 2♦ was wrong I still don't see the need to punish pd bidding 3♦ with xxx

[whereagles]

I prefer dbl to 2D playing equal level correction. But that's just me.. lol.

[the hog]

Dont like 2D - very average suit quality and what is it going to achieve? 3/10

3D is automatic - lets get the bidding up there. I would bid this every day of the week. 10/10

X is pushy. 3/10

4D is very poor - the worst bid in the auction by a street - 0/10

[Fluffy]

luis, on Jul 28 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

2♦: 7/10 I think it's quite reasonable, lot of people that object this bid will bid it at the table, hard to resist overcalling 2♦ when you have a good hand with diamonds.

Not me, ,but at least I agree some extra strrenght for the call has a point, 2HCP far from me for that matter, but its closer than many other 2m overcalls I often see.


Some people say 3♦ is not a bad bid, I disagree, any raise that is not a jump should show constructive hand, here its not the case at all, I would say a 4♦ bid is a bit too agressive but coul live with it (note that it will be harder that a direct 4♦ bid will be doubled).

[mike777]

2D started the trouble,

I would X, the Italians have been making this bid for 60 years and winning.

[luke warm]

maybe all you who hate 2d are right, but to me the 3d bid was horrible... what's the worst that can happen if you pass 2s? they play it and make it? it might be different if you actually had your bid (imo the stiff spade ace doesn't greatly increase the quality of the hand)