[Hanoi5]

Teams. How low can you go?

---

---

[MrAce]

I'd overcall both. 2♥ and 3♠

First one depends on your style a bit and is not as clear as 2nd one though. 2nd one is clear overcall to me.

[mikeh]

MrAce, on 2015-February-23, 19:59, said:

I'd overcall both. 2♥ and 3♠

First one depends on your style a bit and is not as clear as 2nd one though. 2nd one is clear overcall to me.

Funny: I see the first one as a clear overcall, and the second one, especially with a passed hand partner, as a pass. My concern on the 2nd one is that when we belong in 3♠, we'll usually be in 4♠, often doubled

[Trinidad]

Vul at IMPs the question is: "Is there a decent chance that we can make game?".

On the first hand that is certainly possible. Partner can have values, but no possibility to bid because of his club length. So overcall.

On the second hand game is practically out of the question. Partner has denied values. The cards are on your left. Stay out of the auction.

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

Trinidad, on 2015-February-23, 22:56, said:

On the second hand game is practically out of the question. Partner has denied values. The cards are on your left. Stay out of the auction.

Game can easily be good to laydown, but it's very dangerous to overcall

Q10x, xxx, KQx, Kxx (add a small card of your choice) is one example, but if partner has anything in hearts you are unlikely to make. Also there is a danger that you might concede 300 in 3♠ undoubled because partner has short spades and you can't get to your minor suit fit.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2015-February-24, 02:03, said:

Game can easily be good to laydown, but it's very dangerous to overcall

Q10x, xxx, KQx, Kxx (add a small card of your choice) is one example, but if partner has anything in hearts you are unlikely to make. Also there is a danger that you might concede 300 in 3♠ undoubled because partner has short spades and you can't get to your minor suit fit.

No, even with wasted hearts it has an ok play vulnerable especially if it is imps. You need an excuse to play games when red and team match as opposite of what he said, which was " decent chance to make game" That is for slams, not games.

Axx Kxx Kxx xxx

I can actually make a lot of examples with K of hearts in front of AQ and totally wasted but game makes depending on decisions. However I admit that "clear overcall" comment of mine was an overstatement. As is clear pass. It is probably an aggressive overcall. We all over use this clear-obvious-auto kinda words a lot imo. It often ends up going -100 or -200 vs - 140, or now and then it is -500 or -800 vs nothing as well as +620 vs -140 or even -620.

I like to bid when in doubt. I believe Mike and Rik does too. Obviously they do not doubt this one and I respect their judgement even if I disagree.

[gwnn]

Life is too short to pass on these hands. I don't want to overthink it, I have a seven card suit on the first one and opening values plus a singleton heart on the second one. I will not say that I overcall on all hands that fit these criteria but it's not that far off.

[helene_t]

Hand 1: I want a heart lead against nt - give p one heart honour and if opps need to set up clubs, hearts are in the pocket. Against a spade contract I am on lead myself. I don't aspire to get +620 on this hand, though. Give partner KJx-Kx-KJxx-Jxxx and I hope he won't take my overcall too seriously.

Hand 2: Given that p is a passed hand I consider it close. We don't need much from p to make 3♠. I think I would pass though. WTP 3♠ opposite an unpassed p.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2015-February-24, 02:39, said:

No, even with wasted hearts it has an ok play vulnerable especially if it is imps. You need an excuse to play games when red and team match as opposite of what he said, which was " decent chance to make game" That is for slams, not games.

Axx Kxx Kxx xxx

I can actually make a lot of examples with K of hearts in front of AQ and totally wasted but game makes depending on decisions. However I admit that "clear overcall" comment of mine was an overstatement. As is clear pass. It is probably an aggressive overcall. We all over use this clear-obvious-auto kinda words a lot imo. It often ends up going -100 or -200 vs - 140, or now and then it is -500 or -800 vs nothing as well as +620 vs -140 or even -620.

I like to bid when in doubt. I believe Mike and Rik does too. Obviously they do not doubt this one and I respect their judgement even if I disagree.

Game isn't worth bidding opposite the hand you give (you're only 52% not to have 2 spade losers and then you have to find ♦Q, on a club lead the K♥ doesn't help even if it works)

I also like to bid vulnerable games, but this hand just seems a little too poor, also a spade lead can be a disaster against 3N, give partner ♠Kxx and ♦K9xx for example.

[Zelandakh]

I dislike 2♥ on the first one quite a lot but recognise that it would be ok for many. I have more sympathy for 3♠ on the second and might not be able to resist at the table. My calm, rational forum-self says to make a disciplined pass here too though.

[foobar]

2♥ (first) and Pass (second) for me.

[mikeh]

MrAce, on 2015-February-24, 02:39, said:

No, even with wasted hearts it has an ok play vulnerable especially if it is imps. You need an excuse to play games when red and team match as opposite of what he said, which was " decent chance to make game" That is for slams, not games.

Axx Kxx Kxx xxx

I can actually make a lot of examples with K of hearts in front of AQ and totally wasted but game makes depending on decisions. However I admit that "clear overcall" comment of mine was an overstatement. As is clear pass. It is probably an aggressive overcall. We all over use this clear-obvious-auto kinda words a lot imo. It often ends up going -100 or -200 vs - 140, or now and then it is -500 or -800 vs nothing as well as +620 vs -140 or even -620.

I like to bid when in doubt. I believe Mike and Rik does too. Obviously they do not doubt this one and I respect their judgement even if I disagree.

Timo, you are one of my favourite posters and I respect your style a lot, but here I think you have fallen into the common trap of imagining a hand that makes your instinctive choice look reasonable, when in fact the hand you are picturing, and similar hands, are very unlikely.

Look at it this way:

Give RHO 5-8 hcp for his 2nd seat favourable pre-empt, and partner no more than a modest 11 count.

Partner will hold 0-11, and LHO will hold 11-25.

Why are you making your bidding decisions on the assumption that your partner holds a max....and a max that is made up of controls?

A simulation would be useful to allow us to gauge how often partner's hand will mesh well with ours, but absent a lot of subjective analysis will be otherwise limited. Thus how often will LHO double when we are in trouble? How often will we seem to be about to escape in 3♠ undoubled, -1 or 2, and have partner, who is aware that we are red v white at imps, refasten the noose around our neck by raising, giving LHO a virtually free shot at double, when he might have been nervous about doubling a partscore?

Part of the problem is that it isn't enough to say: we are vulnerable at imps and therefore need to be aggressive. We need to ask ourselves how we expect partner to think.

Is partner, holding a reasonable 7 or 8 count with, say, Qxx in spades, or a decent 8-9 count with Kx in spades, supposed to argue...hmm...partner is red....therefore he is being hyper-aggressive and I have to pull back? Or is he supposed to say: hmm....I have a close decision and we are red at imps....I'm raising?

I suspect, Timo, that if you were my partner you'd be thinking the latter, not the former....and it is that way that 500's against 140-170 or 800 against 420 are created.

Does that mean that bidding is silly? No. Does it mean that it definitely won't work? No, of course not. I think the hand is very, very close, and if you made my spades Q10xxxx, I would be bidding for sure. We all draw the line somewhere....the OP hand is on the far side of the line for me.

[Tramticket]

I don't see the rush to bid on hand 1. Sitting in the sandwich seat with both opponents unlimited, you may as well pass on this round. If east rebids 2C or 1NT and west passes you can now protect with 2H. And I don't see any imperative for a heart lead.
I think hand 2 is a closer decision - but still best to pass I think.

[PhilKing]

Just a guess, but I suspect 2♥ has a neutral expected value on the first (playing strength is good, which is the number one consideration, but we have the death holding in spades along with the other obvious flaws) and a small loser on the second.

On the first hand, I quite like pass then 2♥, but I play it as showing hearts and spades, in order to stop me partners balancing with trash and going for a number.