Nat NT overcalls in the trap
#1
Posted 2010-July-30, 12:29
With the modern penchant for filthy openings and even filthier responses, I understand the desire to get in the auction in situations which in the past would have been considered too dangerous.
#2
Posted 2010-July-30, 13:12
#3
Posted 2010-July-30, 16:02
I have been wondering lately if 15-18 really is the right interval for a NT-overcall in direct position. Perhaps it is too conservative. Perhaps one should lower it by appr. 1 point.
Thin openings (and thin responses) might be shifting the correct weighting between safety and aggression. We are more likely than in the old days to get stolen from, and we are harder to double in 1NT because opener might be thin in responder's view. Getting sensible in to the auction tends to carry such dividends, even with the more balanced hands. Just a thought.
#4
Posted 2010-July-30, 16:02
#5
Posted 2010-July-30, 18:28
Then get on your NT response scheme --save memory with same responses.
Or to show stops and little interest in the unbid major?
This clarifies T/O dbl --that's worthwhile.
Either choice begs 'what is left for reopening'?
Another critical partition: immediate act vs delayed act. Which hands which way.
#6
Posted 2010-July-30, 19:48
#7
Posted 2010-July-30, 20:11
#8
Posted 2010-July-30, 22:09
MFA, on Jul 30 2010, 03:02 PM, said:
I have been wondering lately if 15-18 really is the right interval for a NT-overcall in direct position. Perhaps it is too conservative. Perhaps one should lower it by appr. 1 point.
Thin openings (and thin responses) might be shifting the correct weighting between safety and aggression. We are more likely than in the old days to get stolen from, and we are harder to double in 1NT because opener might be thin in responder's view. Getting sensible in to the auction tends to carry such dividends, even with the more balanced hands. Just a thought.
Back in my young and crazy days, I played 13-16 1NT overcalls NV for a while. It actually worked reasonably well when it came up, but the problem was that you then had to double with 17 balanced.
#10
Posted 2010-July-31, 03:53
MFA, on Jul 30 2010, 10:02 PM, said:
I have been wondering lately if 15-18 really is the right interval for a NT-overcall in direct position. Perhaps it is too conservative. Perhaps one should lower it by appr. 1 point.
Thin openings (and thin responses) might be shifting the correct weighting between safety and aggression. We are more likely than in the old days to get stolen from, and we are harder to double in 1NT because opener might be thin in responder's view. Getting sensible in to the auction tends to carry such dividends, even with the more balanced hands. Just a thought.
I like this idea, and I believe it will be an advantage for the 14-16 hands that overcall 1NT in second, however the 17-18 hands and 19-20 hands are losing big then having to be big more agressively.
About the sandwich overcall I have started to play it strong for about a year, but hasn't come up yet even once
#11
Posted 2010-July-31, 18:20
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#12
Posted 2010-July-31, 21:23
16-19 seems about right for my slightly less conservative self these days.
#13
Posted 2010-August-01, 18:11
You go for a number when you don't have a decent runout suit (which is reasonably unlikely bearing in mind they've bid their suits) not because you're a jack light.

Help
