[Winstonm]

---

What is your choice of poisons - or is that sweet wine in the cup?

[mw64ahw]

I play a NT Takeout so 1NT for me at Equal Vulnerability

[jillybean]

This is exactly the type of hand I get into a lot of trouble with, anything other than pass can turn out badly.

[gszes]

IMPS I would choose 1s under the theory that the suit is generally good enough to inhibit a penalty X. Another advantage of 1S is that if the bidding goes 1s p p X I am in good position to xx which would almost surely show 5413 of 5314 or a cruddy 5305/5503 hand (which happens to be what I have). Far less dangerous approach than any other bidding (though pass may work).

MP Since all I am risking is one board I am going for it all with 2d. Yes YES I know it's icky but If we are going to win the bidding this seems the best way to do so. X with virtually zero defense just seems plain wrong to me. (PASS YOU SAY?) SIGH, I admit it can work but, it just feels so WIMPY at MP.

[DavidKok]

What's the form of scoring? I like 1♠ at matchpoints and 2♦ at IMPs.

[LBengtsson]

Winstonm, on 2021-August-11, 14:08, said:

---

What is your choice of poisons - or is that sweet wine in the cup?

good problem Winstonm. no quick tricks but good shape. too weak for red/red michaels cue bid I think so I will be contented with 1♠. pass instead will make life difficult for partner if opps. raise ♦. we might miss ♥ fit if I bid 1♠ but you cannot always find the right bid at the table. 1♠ is sensible.

[sfi]

jillybean, on 2021-August-11, 14:22, said:

This is exactly the type of hand I get into a lot of trouble with, anything other than pass can turn out badly.

Pass can turn out badly too. The cost of inaction is often overlooked, but it can be just as damaging to your score.

Here I'd try 2D with no great conviction. 1S and double are both in the mix, but 1S buries hearts (I'm not bidding again unless forced) and double has a bunch of flaws that kind of add up here (5-card major, void, lack of quick tricks). If we swap the suits around and they opened 1H, I don't relish committing to 3 of a minor and would just overcall 1S.

[Winstonm]

Spoiler

---

How it actually went.

[mikeh]

gszes, on 2021-August-11, 15:42, said:

IMPS I would choose 1s under the theory that the suit is generally good enough to inhibit a penalty X. Another advantage of 1S is that if the bidding goes 1s p p X I am in good position to xx which would almost surely show 5413 of 5314 or a cruddy 5305/5503 hand (which happens to be what I have). Far less dangerous approach than any other bidding (though pass may work).

MP Since all I am risking is one board I am going for it all with 2d. Yes YES I know it's icky but If we are going to win the bidding this seems the best way to do so. X with virtually zero defense just seems plain wrong to me. (PASS YOU SAY?) SIGH, I admit it can work but, it just feels so WIMPY at MP.

I would be surprised if many good players played (1D) 1S (p) p (x) xx as an attempt to get out of 1S.

I think it shows a super maximum 1S overcall….a hand on which one was thinking about doubling 2D and then bidding spades.

[Winstonm]

mikeh, on 2021-August-13, 09:20, said:

I would be surprised if many good players played (1D) 1S (p) p (x) xx as an attempt to get out of 1S.

I think it shows a super maximum 1S overcall….a hand on which one was thinking about doubling 2D and then bidding spades.

I hadn’t really thought about the redouble but to me it should emphasize excellent suit quality and tricks but not great high card strength.

[gszes]

mikeh, on 2021-August-13, 09:20, said:

I would be surprised if many good players played (1D) 1S (p) p (x) xx as an attempt to get out of 1S.

I think it shows a super maximum 1S overcall….a hand on which one was thinking about doubling 2D and then bidding spades.

I do not often disagree with MIKEH but IMHO playing xx to give the opps another chance seems to make little sense with virtually zero upside. xx played my way is not a run out of 1s so much as an opportunity to further clarify the type of 1s overcall I had. Utility alone would seem to make the weaker use of xx far more valuable than trying to belatedly show a powerhouse overcall.

[gszes]

Winstonm, on 2021-August-13, 09:55, said:

I hadn’t really thought about the redouble but to me it should emphasize excellent suit quality and tricks but not great high card strength.

sounds more like some sort of preemptive hand to me maybe an example would help clarify

[mikeh]

gszes, on 2021-August-13, 11:25, said:

I do not often disagree with MIKEH but IMHO playing xx to give the opps another chance seems to make little sense with virtually zero upside. xx played my way is not a run out of 1s so much as an opportunity to further clarify the type of 1s overcall I had. Utility alone would seem to make the weaker use of xx far more valuable than trying to belatedly show a powerhouse overcall.

If you are a player who thinks that a one-level overcall is limited to something like a good 15 count, then you have a plausible argument

I think it fair to say that that style is no longer prevalent amongst good players. Personally, I’m a strong believer in the approach often attributed to Kokish. I rarely double without at least tolerance for both unbid majors, if the open 1m, as one example.

I’d overcall with say AKQ109x x xxx AQx and then redouble.

It helps, if playing this style, to use transfer advances, such that advancer need not be shy about raising my 1M overcall with modest values and 3 card support. (1x) 1M (p) 2M is NOT constructive in any way…with a sound raise, one bids a transfer (so 2H if I overcalled 1S, and 2D would show 5+ hearts and some reason to bid, but not necessarily the sort of hand one would need for 2H natural.

As for frequency, if I’ve overcalled light and the next two players passed, and opener doubled, I think it’s silly to go chasing for a 2-level fit when advancer couldn’t bid after 1S. The auction is too often going to turn into a double-fest for the opps, with us getting voluntarily to the 2-level with the defence marked….they lead trump at every opportunity.

Picture partner with a bad 2=2=6=3….I get to play in 1S doubles…you get to 1S xx or 2S x. Nice methods.

As for including 55 hands, both majors….good luck with that, if only on a frequency basis. Exactly how common is it to be 5-5 majors and not cuebid, and have safety in 2H? And get there?

Meanwhile, why would I preempt with my sound opening bid? Or why bid 2S rather than redouble? Partner has modest values….by redoubling I may get to play there but also I may enable partner, who knows what he holds better than I do, to compete with xx in spades or to take a piece of their contract with, say, 1=4=4=4 and not quite enough to have bid earlier.

Put it another way: if I had an expert overcall 1S against me, and I reopened with a double, I’m willing to bet that his redouble is a business redouble…

[Winstonm]

gszes, on 2021-August-13, 11:26, said:

sounds more like some sort of preemptive hand to me maybe an example would help clarify

I was thinking something like: KQJ109x, Ax, x, xxxx

Basically, my thinking was this: you either want to play 1S redoubled else you want to run. If you want to run, then you can bid your second suit. Ergo, you must want to play 1S xx.

The only other hand that makes sense to me is a 6331 hand that is - as Mike wrote - just shy of a double and bid. But with that hand I don't know why you wouldn't just sit for the double.

So, if you eliminate the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. Your deal, Dr. Watson.

[DavidKok]

Winstonm, on 2021-August-13, 12:19, said:

The only other hand that makes sense to me is a 6331 hand that is - as Mike wrote - just shy of a double and bid. But with that hand I don't know why you wouldn't just sit for the double.

Because the opponents won't sit for the double. You need to inform partner that that flat 7-count without a fit they're holding is worth a penalty double on the 2-level.

[Winstonm]

DavidKok, on 2021-August-13, 13:39, said:

Because the opponents won't sit for the double. You need to inform partner that that flat 7-count without a fit they're holding is worth a penalty double on the 2-level.

But won't you have another chance to double if opps bid? What is the difference then between immediate redouble and a subsequent double when they bid at the two level?

[DavidKok]

Waiting for them to get to the 2-level is tricky business. As a rule of thumb you don't want to let the opponents play an 8-card fit on the 2-level, pretty much regardless of the division of the high card points (this is simply LOTT, although on occasion you may want to go against it and defend anyway). In practice it is extremely difficult to orchestrate this.

Let's consider a different auction: 1NT-(X)-XX*-(2♣);, where the redouble means "7+ points, we got them (or 10+ opposite 12-14)", and I don't really care if the initial double was penalty or conventional as long as the clubs bid was natural. How do you make sure you punish the opponents on 7-card fits, but consider bidding on (3NT/4♥/4♠ might be on!) if they have found a solid 8-card fit? Traditionally there are two schemes: penalty doubles and takeout doubles.
Using penalty doubles, a player in direct seat can make a penalty double holding a 4-card or good 3-card suit (on this auction, in clubs), and passes with 2 (or fewer, but my 1NT opening has at least two). In passout seat responder can double with a 4-card or good 3-card suit, and has to bid holding 2 or fewer. And if we have ♣Qxx opposite ♣Jxx they escape!
Using takeout doubles, the player in direct seat can double to show exactly 2 cards, and pass promises 3 or more (even with an empty three-card suit). Responder in passout seat can double with a desire to defend (can be as short as 2 if opener passed the 2♣ bid) or bid with shortness. If responder has a weak doubleton and decides to run while opener happens to have 4 (or 5!) the opponents escape, and even if the clubs are divided 5-1 they escape (which happens to be one of the best layouts for defence, so know what you're giving up).

On the auction (1♦)-1♠-(P)-P; (X)-P!-(2♣)-P; (P)-? you are in a very similar situation, except you are now in passout seat and have no clue about partner's club holding. Does a double by you promise 4/a good 3? Can you double with general strength and a doubleton? What if partner has 4 clubs? By redoubling the first time it comes around to you you activate your penalty mechanism - far from perfect, but at least you now have a way to coordinate tightening the noose.

[Winstonm]

DavidKok, on 2021-August-14, 01:45, said:

Waiting for them to get to the 2-level is tricky business. As a rule of thumb you don't want to let the opponents play an 8-card fit on the 2-level, pretty much regardless of the division of the high card points (this is simply LOTT, although on occasion you may want to go against it and defend anyway). In practice it is extremely difficult to orchestrate this.

Let's consider a different auction: 1NT-(X)-XX*-(2♣);, where the redouble means "7+ points, we got them (or 10+ opposite 12-14)", and I don't really care if the initial double was penalty or conventional as long as the clubs bid was natural. How do you make sure you punish the opponents on 7-card fits, but consider bidding on (3NT/4♥/4♠ might be on!) if they have found a solid 8-card fit? Traditionally there are two schemes: penalty doubles and takeout doubles.
Using penalty doubles, a player in direct seat can make a penalty double holding a 4-card or good 3-card suit (on this auction, in clubs), and passes with 2 (or fewer, but my 1NT opening has at least two). In passout seat responder can double with a 4-card or good 3-card suit, and has to bid holding 2 or fewer. And if we have ♣Qxx opposite ♣Jxx they escape!
Using takeout doubles, the player in direct seat can double to show exactly 2 cards, and pass promises 3 or more (even with an empty three-card suit). Responder in passout seat can double with a desire to defend (can be as short as 2 if opener passed the 2♣ bid) or bid with shortness. If responder has a weak doubleton and decides to run while opener happens to have 4 (or 5!) the opponents escape, and even if the clubs are divided 5-1 they escape (which happens to be one of the best layouts for defence, so know what you're giving up).

On the auction (1♦)-1♠-(P)-P; (X)-P!-(2♣)-P; (P)-? you are in a very similar situation, except you are now in passout seat and have no clue about partner's club holding. Does a double by you promise 4/a good 3? Can you double with general strength and a doubleton? What if partner has 4 clubs? By redoubling the first time it comes around to you you activate your penalty mechanism - far from perfect, but at least you now have a way to coordinate tightening the noose.

You have a reasonable argument but I am unsure if penalizing opponents after your overcall is a maximum strategy. Wouldn’t it be better to tell your partner you have strength to play in the suit you bid? AKQ9xx, xx,x, AQ109 . I may want to defend with that hand but more likely I want partner to compete with xx in spades.

But then I also think red v white should not use weak jump overcall and bidding systems should be designed for the scoring system being used.

[DavidKok]

Isn't that what 1♠ means? At any rate you could raise to 2♠ to increase the pressure. If you're not staking a claim to the balance of strength and you can't preempt, what goal are you achieving by bidding? Is the aim to balance 2-over-2?