[euclidz]

---

Looking at other bids of this hand it was a mixture of Dble and 3♦ over Nth's opening of 1♥. East has 17hcp, 2 of which are dead in the water. By the bye it's a strong hand. Dble shows opening points, 3D should also have opening points but those points might come from length in ♦ rather than actual hcp. Which is the better bid and why?

(Apologies if I've posted this in the wrong section (as it's probably not that interesting))

[billw55]

Looks like routine 2♦ to me. Not strong enough to double and pull, or jump overcall (if you play that as strong).

[rmnka447]

I agree with 2 ♦. ♦ are the dominant feature of the hand. Your hand isn't strong enough to double and then bid ♦. With the ♥ Q stiff and the opponents bidding them, it really is difficult to view it as any different than ♥ x. So to me the hand would be more like a 14 HCP unless partner makes a bid that indicates the queen might be of some value.

Since many people play weak jump overcalls, doubling then bidding your suit has become the normal way to show more than minimum range overcalls -- typically 16+ HCP and a good suit.

But there's another reason for bidding 2 ♦ first. It may let you compete further later on in the auction. For example, if the auction went -- (1 ♥) - 2 ♦ - (2 ♥) - P - (P), you could now double and you'd be showing just about exactly the hand that you have. Partner would know your ♦ must be decent because the double may force a preference to ♦ at the 3 level.

If your hand were a little different -- say -- ♠ A10xx ♥ Q ♦ AJxxx ♣ KJx, double would be preferable as your diamonds aren't very strong and you'd like to avoid losing the potential 8 card ♠ fit.

If you have something like ♠ AKxx ♥ Q ♦ AQ9xxx ♣ xx, I think you might consider bidding 2 ♠ instead of doubling after 2 ♥ is passed back to you. If you were 5-5 or 6-5 in these two suits, you could start with Michaels instead. So I'm thinking that 2 ♠ would show a good hand with probably 4 ♠ and 6 ♦ (Anyone else want to comment?)

But more than anything else, think ahead about what second bids you might make to describe your hand to your partner and finding the right competitive bid will be easier.

[aguahombre]

rmnka447, on 2015-November-09, 15:02, said:

If you have something like ♠ AKxx ♥ Q ♦ AQ9xxx ♣ xx, I think you might consider bidding 2 ♠ instead of doubling after 2 ♥ is passed back to you. If you were 5-5 or 6-5 in these two suits, you could start with Michaels instead. So I'm thinking that 2 ♠ would show a good hand with probably 4 ♠ and 6 ♦ (Anyone else want to comment?)

Yes I would. The other paragraphs you posted seem fine, but this one needs work, IMO.

There are two similar hand patterns which are not the same here.

(1♥) ??
You hold AKxx Q AQ9xx xx. This is a nice hand to Double first, and then convert a Club advance to Diamonds. If a 2♥ raise comes back around to you opposite a silent partner, it is probably best to let it go.

However, with AKxx Q xx AQ9xxx you are not strong enough to Double first and convert partner's Diamond advance to clubs at a higher level. So, the 2♣ overcall would be appropriate. If a 2♥ raise comes back around, your partner's silence (no responsive Double, for instance) might suggest letting this one go as well, but a reopening 2♠ is an agressive alternative.

There is a 3rd pattern worth noting: xx Q AQ9xxx AKxx. There, you would overcall 2♦ and consider balancing with a "delay unusual" 2nt when 2♥ comes back to you. This shows the 2-card disparity between the two minor suits.

[Zelandakh]

Whether 3♦ is a reasonable bid on this hand depends on agreements. The majority of players, particularly when NV, play this as showing a weak hand, so-called weak jump overcalls. This hand is too strong for that action. A very small number of players still play strong jump overcalls - this type of hand is typically shown by doubling and then bidding the suit these days and this hand would in any case probably be seen as too weak by most. The third alternative is intermediate jump overcalls. This covers hands with a 6 card suit from a sound opening bid at the bottom end to the top of a normal double strength. I imagine that the 3♦ bidders were using this agreement. In any case, you can mark me down with the 2♦ bidders and with it a suggestion to think about your agreement for a jump overcall at these colours.

[euclidz]

---

This was the hand played on BBO. As I and most playing BBO don't have regular partners there is no partnership understandings outside of our individual profiles. With this hand this partner left the table after the bidding without saying goodbye! I presumed he/she left because he/she saw that we should have been in 'game' and blamed my bidding? That said, I suppose it's possible that he/she left because he/she fell on her sword or then maybe she simply got a phone call! I made 12 tricks! Looking at others bids the bid that got to game (in any decent order) went 2♦ 3♣ but I can't see that leading anywhere other 4 / 5♣.

[Zelandakh]

euclidz, on 2015-November-10, 06:19, said:

With this hand this partner left the table after the bidding without saying goodbye!

Your partner is not here to defend themselves and it is trivial to find their name, so this could easily be seen as a form of attack. It is also easy to see from the hand records that they did not jump onto another table after leaving. Indeed, the player often seems to play only 1 or 2 hands at a table so it seems like they use BBO for social bridge, filling in gaps in the day. Another thing that is easy to see is that this player is usually partnering Acol players, so it might also be that they could not live with your profile for some reason. As above, they are not here to defend themselves so the whole gist of the thread seems unfair to me.

[euclidz]

I haven't got the time, energy or inclination for clandestine attacks over a hand in Bridge. I posted this post as I genuinely wondered whether a better bid would have been a jump overcall i.e. whether that would have conveyed a clearer picture of my hand. In the real world I play with a regular partner and over the years we have formed an unwritten understanding and with hands like this he would take a jump overcall as more likely to be medium strength hcp and long Diamonds and with hands like this we would normally Dble conveying hcp strength and go from there. Playing with other players in situations like this causes me to question myself and that's what I did here. In fact before posting the question I presumed that I was wrong i.e. my bid was wrong i.e. I should have bid 3♦. Before posting I expected replies something along the lines of . . . "you had a strong hand and a jump overcall of 3♦ better reflects that strength." Maybe, with this hand, neither bid is right or wrong!

[billw55]

Oh come on Zel, that wasn't anything like an attack. He even posted the hand without names. By your logic we could never post a hand we played on BBO because zomg someone could find out who played it!

P.S. that wasn't an attack either

[billw55]

euclidz, on 2015-November-10, 07:15, said:

I haven't got the time, energy or inclination for clandestine attacks over a hand in Bridge. I posted this post as I genuinely wondered whether a better bid would have been a jump overcall i.e. whether that would have conveyed a clearer picture of my hand. In the real world I play with a regular partner and over the years we have formed an unwritten understanding and with hands like this he would take a jump overcall as more likely to be medium strength hcp and long Diamonds and with hands like this we would normally Dble conveying hcp strength and go from there. Playing with other players in situations like this causes me to question myself and that's what I did here. In fact before posting the question I presumed that I was wrong i.e. my bid was wrong i.e. I should have bid 3♦. Before posting I expected replies something along the lines of . . . "you had a strong hand and a jump overcall of 3♦ better reflects that strength." Maybe, with this hand, neither bid is right or wrong!

"Right" or "wrong" depends on your agreements with partner. If you have none, you make your best guess at how partner will understand your bid. In this case, with an unknown partner, I think that 2♦ is most likely to communicate an accurate understanding of your hand.

In the actual auction you present, I consider 3♦ forcing. What west should bid may be an interesting question, but I do not think that pass is correct. North's freebid of 2♠ is also not good; there are a lot of problems with this auction.

Also note, the full hand has diamonds headed by AK, while the original post had AQ. That is a significant difference. Although I still only bid 2♦.

[Zelandakh]

billw55, on 2015-November-10, 07:32, said:

Oh come on Zel, that wasn't anything like an attack. He even posted the hand without names. By your logic we could never post a hand we played on BBO because zomg someone could find out who played it!

One of the best ways of attacking someone on a site like BBF is starting a thread with an apparently legitimate question and then subsequently making information that makes an easily identifiable figure appear in a bad light. Sometimes that happens innocently but often enough not that it is a recognisable a forum tactic. In this case, the OP is perfectly ok but as soon as the comment was made about actions from partner (along with speculation about motives) it starts to get close to the boundary. Like you, I feel that this case is the right side, hence I did not report the thread, but it is similar enough to threads that I have reported that I felt it worth mentioning.

[Charlie Yu]

Given the spade tolerance I can comfortably X and pull.

[aguahombre]

Charlie Yu, on 2015-November-18, 09:53, said:

Given the spade tolerance I can comfortably X and pull.

(1H) ? to you. This seems to be a poster child hand for just the opposite --- 2♦ now, and Double later if a heart raise comes back around.

[ggwhiz]

Your problem in playing with pickup partners on BBO is that nobody else plays that a 3♦ bid shows this hand. Read up on pre-empts and play a more widely used style.

[Phil]

Zelandakh, on 2015-November-10, 07:56, said:

One of the best ways of attacking someone on a site like BBF is starting a thread with an apparently legitimate question and then subsequently making information that makes an easily identifiable figure appear in a bad light. Sometimes that happens innocently but often enough not that it is a recognisable a forum tactic. In this case, the OP is perfectly ok but as soon as the comment was made about actions from partner (along with speculation about motives) it starts to get close to the boundary. Like you, I feel that this case is the right side, hence I did not report the thread, but it is similar enough to threads that I have reported that I felt it worth mentioning.

So I guess I shouldn't ever post a hand from a tourney because some troll might go into acbl live and see I was playing with MARK LEONARD OR WEISHU WU and see what a fish bid I made with them or they did.

[Zelandakh]

Phil, on 2015-November-18, 12:22, said:

So I guess I shouldn't ever post a hand from a tourney because some troll might go into acbl live and see I was playing with MARK LEONARD OR WEISHU WU and see what a fish bid I made with them or they did.

That would rather depend on whether you were merely posting the hand or also reporting them in a bad light. So if you were to come here with a hand and then on receiving a few answers then posted how unethical MARK LEONARD was and how he cussed at you for calling the TD then it would be something different. That is simply what the site ToU say, so perhaps not as controversial as you are trying to portray it to be.

[rmnka447]

aguahombre, on 2015-November-10, 02:19, said:

Yes I would. The other paragraphs you posted seem fine, but this one needs work, IMO.

There are two similar hand patterns which are not the same here.

(1♥) ??
You hold AKxx Q AQ9xx xx. This is a nice hand to Double first, and then convert a Club advance to Diamonds. If a 2♥ raise comes back around to you opposite a silent partner, it is probably best to let it go.

However, with AKxx Q xx AQ9xxx you are not strong enough to Double first and convert partner's Diamond advance to clubs at a higher level. So, the 2♣ overcall would be appropriate. If a 2♥ raise comes back around, your partner's silence (no responsive Double, for instance) might suggest letting this one go as well, but a reopening 2♠ is an agressive alternative.

There is a 3rd pattern worth noting: xx Q AQ9xxx AKxx. There, you would overcall 2♦ and consider balancing with a "delay unusual" 2nt when 2♥ comes back to you. This shows the 2-card disparity between the two minor suits.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. It makes sense.