[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2013-July-15, 12:14, said:

Question: Do you pass over 1C with x, xxx, AK10xx, Jxxx or overcall 1D?

I'm just trying to figure out why everyone is so aggressive with the spade hand after partner shows no encouragement.

I would overcall 2♦ with that and let the opps sort out their major suit fit a level up, 2 or more up if partner can raise.

[HeartA]

nige1, on 2013-July-14, 14:41, said:

IMO 2N = 10, 3N = 9, 3♠ = 8, 2♣ = 7, 2♠ = 6, Pass = 5, 4♠ = 4.
My cards, especially ♦Q, seem to be worth more in notump

IMO, 2C=10, other bid = 0.

[ggwhiz]

Winstonm, on 2013-July-15, 12:14, said:

Question: Do you pass over 1C with x, xxx, AK10xx, Jxxx or overcall 1D?

In my partnership we are completely allergic to bidding 1nt with a stiff and that includes openers and overcalls of 1nt that many here favor.

Your hand above is a 2♦ bid for us but we do miss these things or get stuck on occasion (with stiff honors on a good day) and pay the price after a 3♠ continuation here.

[Zelandakh]

gnasher, on 2013-July-15, 09:27, said:

I think that's a really good idea, btw.

What is the advantage over 2♦ showing the bad hand and 2♣ (and all other rebids) being constructive?

[MrAce]

---

I bid 3♠ and pd passed.

Here is the full deal and how our wheels got off the rail. I probably should have chosen to gf instead of invite. (or should have chosen a stronger way of inviting, but i wanted to keep it simple to avoid accident) I was not even sure whether pd actually promised 2 cards spades tbh. Oh well... 4♠ is down with an imaginative defense i guess, not sure if this is a good excuse to stay out of game when 3NT looks decent

[JLOGIC]

Your partner should not pass 3S obv. That being said a low club is probably a normal lead for someone good when dummy bid NT.

[MrAce]

JLOGIC, on 2013-July-16, 11:54, said:

Your partner should not pass 3S obv. That being said a low club is probably a normal lead for someone good when dummy bid NT.

Maybe, but even ♣ A or ♥ A lead can do the job if they wake up after seeing the dummy.

[mfa1010]

Zelandakh, on 2013-July-16, 01:42, said:

What is the advantage over 2♦ showing the bad hand and 2♣ (and all other rebids) being constructive?

Try thinking the possible auctions through yourself.

For instance. A 2♦-rebid showing a sound overcall with 6+♦ (too strong for an immediate 2♦) is a much nicer bid than a nondescript strength-showing 2♣ cuebid. Same goes for 1N and 2♠.

On the other hand the bad overcall will usually be 5 cards (since no 2♦ bid), so partner should be in a good position to choose a sign-off spot at the 2-level. But the advantages lie with the constructive bids.

It's lebensohl-ish and pretty clever imo. It could be applied anytime the cuebid is cheaper than rebidding the suit.
The treatment is devised for forcing advances, since with nonforcing advances one could just pass many of those hands that should otherwise bid 2♣.

[Zelandakh]

I can see an advantage when the weakness bid is 2 or more steps below our suit but i this specific case I am not seeing it. For example, we could define the 2♣ rebid as showing a constructive hand with 6 diamonds and we are probably still better off. But the extra step makes it flexible enough to carry more hand types than this. Against that, we have lost the ability to play 2 of their suit when Overcaller is weak. I do not think this is close, so I am either missing something or being dense.

[gnasher]

There aren't enough bids available to allow the luxury of a natural 2♣ bid. If the options are:

(1) 2♣ = artificial, invitational+ (including most hands with 6 diamonds); 2♦ = weak, usually 5 cards
(2) 2♣ = Lebensohl, weak or a game-force; 2♦ = invitational with 6 diamonds
(3) 2♣ = natural; 2♦ = weak, usually 5 cards

(3) is worse than (1) or (2), because you've swapped a diamond one-suiter for a club two-suiter. Showing the club hand is less useful because:
- We're unlikely to want to play in clubs after this start.
- It's unlikely to help us to get to 3NT when it's right (whereas knowing of a sixth diamond and extra values will often be useful).
- The 2♣ bid overlaps with the 1NT rebid.

Comparing (1) with (2): (2) has the usual advantage of split-range methods: you get to make descriptive bids on the invitational hands and on the good hands, without the risk of partner getting in the way.

[dake50]

Partner better have S:Qx +DAK + another top card for a game in our future.
I doubt that, but 2S is probably better than 1Nt as I have no sure side entry.
I'll try 2C, then 2S. Partner is up to bat.

[mfa1010]

Thanks gnasher.

[Zelandakh]

Now I see what I was missing - the "or a game force" part. That adds the utility back to the call over weak-only. But now I have another question about this. Is there an argument to use 2♣ as the Lebensohl-like call even when their suit is not clubs in combination with some form of switch? So after (1♥) - 1♠ - (P), 2♣ = weak or GF; and 2♥ = constructive with clubs.

[wank]

playing 2♣ as a ucb and the ucb as clubs is a method popularised in some circles by robson and zia took it up. it seems like a good idea to me, because you can use it like drury with 2 diamonds meaning you're unsure whether to go past 2M or not.

this has nothing to do with the original post btw. just answering zel's question.

[PhilKing]

Zelandakh, on 2013-July-18, 01:04, said:

Now I see what I was missing - the "or a game force" part. That adds the utility back to the call over weak-only. But now I have another question about this. Is there an argument to use 2♣ as the Lebensohl-like call even when their suit is not clubs in combination with some form of switch? So after (1♥) - 1♠ - (P), 2♣ = weak or GF; and 2♥ = constructive with clubs.

Try this:

2♣ = 13+ does not promise fit, or strong with diamonds
2♦ = ucb
2♥ = clubs
2♠ = raise
2NT = circa 15-16 bal inv
3♣ = clubs inv
3♦ = diamonds inv

Over 2♣, overcaller bid 2♦ to show a bad overcall, then responder bids 2♠ with 13-14 bal
2♣ then 2NT = 17+ nat GF
2♣ then anything above 2NT = ♦s strong

It works much the same after 1♣-1♠ or whatever, where it gives more definition to our heart hands (2[hearet] direct NF, stronger goes via 2♣).