What action to take with 4-5 majors
#1
Posted 2017-March-20, 08:48
So here is hand that came up, and the question is what would be you prefered action: Favorable in imps versus good opponents: RHO opens 1♦ which is 4+ and natural and you hold:
♠:AQ32
♥:A9743
♦:6
♣:J65
And as a follow up question: What is our plan if LHO raises diamonds to 2 and 3 and it gets passed around to us?
#2
Posted 2017-March-20, 09:02
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#3
Posted 2017-March-20, 09:18
#4
Posted 2017-March-23, 12:13
My gut reaction was to double, but the more I think about it, I think 1 ♥ is right. It allows partner more options depending on your bidding agreements over overcalls. If partner forces with a ♦ cue, you can bid 2 ♠ to show an opening hand. If partner somehow finds a ♠ bid, you really like your hand and will Take some raising action whether the new suit bid is NF, Constructive NF, or Forcing.
If 2 ♦ (weak) raise is passed back, I'll make the reopening double, but would probably pass 3 ♦ back to me.
#5
Posted 2017-March-23, 18:43
rmnka447, on 2017-March-23, 12:13, said:
Exactly why I prefer a 1♥ overcall so I can usually take further action. If I double I might as well fold my cards and put them in my pocket. That said, after 3♦ passed back to me I'm out if it's limit otherwise I'm doubling.
What is baby oil made of?
#6
Posted 2017-March-24, 03:58
phoenix214, on 2017-March-20, 08:48, said:
So here is hand that came up, and the question is what would be you prefered action: Favorable in imps versus good opponents: RHO opens 1♦ which is 4+ and natural and you hold:
♠:AQ32
♥:A9743
♦:6
♣:J65
Standard bidders sometimes lose a 4-4 S fit after
(1♦)-1♥-(P)-1N
because Advancer thinks/fears that a 1♠ advance would promise 5+ S; or a 5-3 H fit after
(1♦)-X-(P)-1N,
because a 2♥ rebid would not show a Flannery-type hand, but be strong.
I don't know what's best of X and 1♥ when playing with a pick-up partner, but in my regular partnerships I've always made sure that
(1m)-1R-(P)-1M = 4+ M, F1,
partly in order to solve problems like this. So with those partners: 1♥.
phoenix214, on 2017-March-20, 08:48, said:
X (takeout)
#7
Posted 2017-March-24, 06:16
#8
Posted 2017-March-24, 10:07
gszes, on 2017-March-24, 06:16, said:
I agree with you although the others make good arguments for 1♥.
#9
Posted 2017-March-27, 09:06
neilkaz, on 2017-March-24, 10:07, said:
But do you really want partner to give a false preference to 3♥ when he has some junk with two hearts?
That is the reason why I would double:
- If we can make game because partner has three card heart support, he will be so strong that he will come to life and force me to suggest hearts.
- If we can make game because of our fit in the major, partner will be able to judge the situation immediately because I have shown both majors.
- But if we can't make game, I certainly don't want to force partner beyond the 1 level.
This hand is worth only one action, either double or overcall, and -to my taste- the double is more descriptive, for the reasons above. For an overcall, followed by a double, I need a slightly better hand and suit. (And for a double followed by an overcall, I need a lot more.)
Rik
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!), but Thats funny Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#10
Posted 2017-March-27, 09:57
ggwhiz, on 2017-March-23, 18:43, said:
I agree with all the above reasoning and come to the opposite conclusion. I don't have enough goods to take further action, even after a simple weak single raise comes back to me. So, I double and fold my cards, putting them into my pocket -- having shown somewhere around opening strength with support for the other 3 suits.
Trinidad was more eloquent in this view.
#11
Posted 2017-June-20, 07:56
EDIT: My father (usually the only partner I ever play with) and I use Michael's and even Unusual 2NT with 4-4 distribution, rarely, but that is in play and we respond accordingly.
#12
Posted 2017-June-24, 15:24
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#13
Posted 2017-June-24, 15:30
#14
Posted 2017-June-24, 16:21
Winstonm, on 2017-June-24, 15:30, said:
Equally you double and partner with KJ, KQx, xxx, xxxxx bids clubs and they cash 3 clubs and 3 diamonds when 3♥ was cold.
It's not an easy problem, to some extent it depends what you overcall on, for us this would be absolutely minimum for 1♥ over 1♦ which cuts nothing out, and partner responds to it like an opening bid so the spade suit doesn't get buried, but this is very much a fringe treatment.
I'd overcall 1♥ and x not necessarily showing extras if some number of diamonds comes back to me
#15
Posted 2017-June-24, 17:27
Trinidad, on 2017-March-27, 09:06, said:
- If we can make game because partner has three card heart support, he will be so strong that he will come to life and force me to suggest hearts.
But you can't suggest five hearts.
By the way, I suspect rhm doubles here because I think his heart overcall denies four spades.
#16
Posted 2017-June-24, 17:51
phoenix214, on 2017-March-20, 08:48, said:
And as a follow up question: What is our plan if LHO raises diamonds to 2 and 3 and it gets passed around to us?
I rank
- Double = T/O. You have a 3-suiter and it seems reasonable to treat your poor ♥ suit as 4 cards.
- 2♦ = ART. Michaels. Exaggerates your major holdings.
- 1♥ = NAT. IMO, bidding ♥s and then doubling exaggerates the quality of the ♥ suit and the strength of the hand.
Over 1♣ (but not 1♦), some modern partnerships agree that the cue-bid (2♣) shows 5-4 in the majors.
I'm worried that cartruck describes as "Michaels" a cue-overcall that can show 4-4, by agreement.
#17
Posted 2017-June-25, 07:01
Cyberyeti, on 2017-June-24, 16:21, said:
It's not an easy problem, to some extent it depends what you overcall on, for us this would be absolutely minimum for 1♥ over 1♦ which cuts nothing out, and partner responds to it like an opening bid so the spade suit doesn't get buried, but this is very much a fringe treatment.
I'd overcall 1♥ and x not necessarily showing extras if some number of diamonds comes back to me
Winning bridge to a great extent is a matter of playing for the best odds - 1H has an advantage when partner holds exactly 3 hearts. Double has the flexibility for the other hand types that partner may hold that allows us to compete. It seems to me that double offers the best odds.
#18
Posted 2017-June-25, 08:32
Winstonm, on 2017-June-25, 07:01, said:
No, 1 ♥ has the flexibility to make another call later such as DBL. Starting DBL does not.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#19
Posted 2017-June-30, 02:23
nige1, on 2017-June-24, 17:51, said:
I would hope that he does not give Michaels as an explanation to opponents as that would clearly be misinformation. It would also be problematic to use the term without further commentary in forums. Calling it Michaels between him and his father is just fine.
#20
Posted 2017-June-30, 04:07
nullve, on 2017-March-24, 03:58, said:
(1♦)-1♥-(P)-1N
because Advancer thinks/fears that a 1♠ advance would promise 5+ S; or a 5-3 H fit after
(1♦)-X-(P)-1N,
because a 2♥ rebid would not show a Flannery-type hand, but be strong.
I would not throw this sequence ((1♦)-X-(P)-1N-(P)-2♥) at partner without discussion, but I beg to differ.
Even playing standard I do not understand why so many insist bidding 2♥ here needs to be reserved for hands too strong to overcall immediately.
My guess is the reason is lazy thinking.
Playing equal level conversion anyway this is a clear flannery type sequence (could be 6♥-4♠).
What the matter is wrong with bidding 3♥ over 1N to show a powerhouse, assuming a 1N in response to a takeout dbl shows some values.
It is not like takeout doubler has any problem differentiating strong hands with a heart suit.
Are 3♥,4♥ or 2♦ followed by hearts not enough to differentiate between very strong heart hands, which occur every other leap year anyway while the flannery hand type is quite common?
The risk of missing a spade fit (or a club fit) by overcalling 1♥ (LHO might preempt next) is far more likely than missing a good heart fit by starting with a double.
Sometimes we will have a fit in both majors, in which case playing spades will often be preferable, due to ruffing diamonds with the "short" trump side can provide extra tricks.
When we overcall 1♥ partner will not look fro a spade fit when he has heart support, say 5♠-3♥s.
Rainer Herrmann