Worst 2 level overcall
#1
Posted 2014-June-05, 02:11
How does this one compare?:
Vulnerable against not, dealer passes, 2nd hand opens 1♠, 3rd hand holds ♠AQx ♥Jxxxx ♦xx ♣Kxx and bids 2♥
#2
Posted 2014-June-05, 02:28
#3
Posted 2014-June-05, 02:36
EricK, on 2014-June-05, 02:11, said:
How does this one compare?:
Vulnerable against not, dealer passes, 2nd hand opens 1♠, 3rd hand holds ♠AQx ♥Jxxxx ♦xx ♣Kxx and bids 2♥
This is by far not the worst.
#4
Posted 2014-June-05, 03:19
♠AJ752 ♥5 ♦532 ♣AQ86 1st seat@Game All
P - (1♥) - P - (1♠);
2♣
And here is a red 4 level overcall from the same player with a bonus 5 level follow-up:
♠7 ♥KQ65 ♦KJT75 ♣Q62 3rd seat@Red vs White
P - (P) - P - (1♠);
P - (2NT)* - P - (4♠);
P - (P) - 4NT - (P);
5♣ - (X) - 5NT
* natural, invitational
You could also look at a few of my more creative overcalls, a few of which I have posted here if you look around.
#5
Posted 2014-June-05, 06:05
-gwnn
#6
Posted 2014-June-05, 06:17
#7
Posted 2014-June-05, 08:38
I held something like ♠Kxx ♥AKQxx ♦AKQJ ♣x, and nobody vul. (I am not 100% sure of the whole hand, but diamonds are 100% accurate.)
My partner opened 1♣, the wife on my right passes and I responded 1♥. Now the husband on the left bid 2♦, my partner makes a support double, and RHO passes. I passed too. Yes, we did have a slam, but the 1400 in 2♦X -6 was better. LHO couldn't complain: Dummy showed up with the ♠A and a diamond honor! (The overcall was on ♦9xxxx.)
The conversation after the hand was short and intense: I suspect that the husband slept on the couch for the rest of the week.
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
#8
Posted 2014-June-05, 09:16
I hold something like:
♠ AKQJ9x
♥ xx
♦ xxx
♣ xx
My partner open 1NT (15-17) and RHO overcalled with 2♠. Natural, not even two-suited. Guess who hold the 10 of ♠.
#9
Posted 2014-June-05, 10:34
What is baby oil made of?
#10
Posted 2014-June-05, 10:48
helene_t, on 2014-June-05, 06:17, said:
On a related note, I used to make a ton of natural "cuebid" overcalls on three-card suits, but these were effective for a weird reason.
I played with a lady years ago who was the most timid player I have ever seen. So, to open her up a bit, I talked her into a light initial action system where most 8-counts were opened. Related, our overcalls were 0+, and we played R.U.N.T.
So, suppose you have this auction:
1♦-P-1♠-?
Partner's pass, when playing R.U.N.T. and 0+ overcalls, is very telling. I could usually predict a 5+ holding in diamonds. Thus, this auction occurred quite frequently:
1♦-P-1♠-2♦! (natural, with 3+ diamonds)
-P.J. Painter.
#11
Posted 2014-June-05, 11:07
kenrexford, on 2014-June-05, 10:48, said:
Were the opps also so clued in on all of the negative inferences available?
#12
Posted 2014-June-05, 11:52
All during the defense my PD (a rude pickup) was typing stuff like (my X was support you idiot, we missed a cold game..how can you pass?). Well +1400 after declarer gave us an extra trick (missed an endplay) when +1100 was cold for us.
#13
Posted 2014-June-05, 12:03
Zelandakh, on 2014-June-05, 11:07, said:
No. Apparently, you apparently (I tried for a while) are not supposed to alert a pass and then provide an absurdly convoluted set of bizarre inferences.
Plus, many of the inferences come from what is in my hand, which surely is not alertable.
On the first point, I used to have fun explaining inferences. This can truly be fun. Consider an example.
"Alert."
"Yes?"
"Partner has one of several hand types. If he is balanced, he has a sort of Woodson-style two-way holding, meaning either a weaker range of 11-14 HCP or a higher range of 18-19 HCP. He might also be unbalanced, with at least four clubs. The unbalanced range runs anywhere from 8 HCP up to about 22 HCP. If he is unbalanced, he can have a 5-card major. His club suit could be his shortest suit, his second-shortest suit, his second-longest suit, or his longest suit. "
"Has this been pre-approved?"
"Yes. This is part of a system called Standard American."
-P.J. Painter.
#14
Posted 2014-June-05, 13:55
neilkaz, on 2014-June-05, 11:52, said:
This happens all the freaking time in the MBC. I even have a standard profile note for it, I call it "late entry" and use it very frequently. They can't open the bidding at the one level, nor can they preempt, but they can butt in later at the two level after both ops have bid. This is almost always done on a bad five card suit.
-gwnn
#15
Posted 2014-June-05, 14:37
billw55, on 2014-June-05, 13:55, said:
The same player as in the OP did this to me a few weeks back:
Me LHO CHO RHO
P P P 1♠
P 2♥ 3♣
I never seem to be able to get through to him how this sort of bidding makes no logical sense.
Why is it that some people can never seem to grasp "bridge logic"? I'm no expert, and I might not have been able to work this sort of thing out all by myself, but I never needed it explained more than once.
#16
Posted 2014-June-05, 19:13
kenrexford, on 2014-June-05, 12:03, said:
"Yes. This is part of a system called Standard American."
ROFL!
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#17
Posted 2014-June-05, 19:35
Zelandakh, on 2014-June-05, 11:07, said:
They don't need to be.
#18
Posted 2014-June-06, 00:53
Then there is my partner who likes to overcall opponents 5 card major opening with his 4 card in the same suit. But surpriingly this has always turned into a top somehow.
#19
Posted 2014-June-06, 03:30
the hog, on 2014-June-05, 19:35, said:
And this is the problem and the reason why Fred and others have a good point when they support unusual systems remaining banned. It does not matter that a convention has little bridge merit if the opps are unable to defend against it due to insufficient information or, in extreme cases, time to prepare. When the opps catch on to what you are doing you just change it to the next unusual method.
It is my view, and I know I am not alone in this, that regulation of methods allowed should be relaxed in many areas but that there should be a burden of responsibility in playing such methods that opponents are aware of all inferences in a timely manner. In the case of a non-alertable call such as a pass that would mean a pre-alert, probably in conjunction with an additional sheet for the CC. If we were able to improve disclosure that would go some way to improving the situation with regards to "germ warfare". Not completely of course, since familiarity is very important in bridge, but enough that most of the worst-offending methods would probably phase out naturally after a few years.
To be honest I am surprised that methods such as RUNT are not pre-alertable in the ACBL. The SAYC exampe is obviously silly because, as above, the key here is familiarity rather than complexity.
#20
Posted 2014-June-06, 04:17
Maybe the pass should be alerted. In Ken Rexford's case I think it should be, but that is pretty extreme.
I know the ACBL doesn't require negative inference to be alerted. I can sorta understand this but probably the idea is that you don't need to alert when it doesn't matter much. Since there isn't any difference between positive and negative inference. You could for example define Muiderberg as a 5-card preempt showing an unbalanced hand and denying a 4-card in the other major. Then it becomes negative inference that you have a 4+ card in a minor, but obviously that doesn't make it any less alertable.
Once my partner passed in direct seat holding a completely normal 1NT overcall - but we play raptor. Declarer misguessed because he thought my partner couldn't have 16 points and be silent in the auction. Afterwards he said he thought I should have alerted my partner's pass. I think he has a point. It is a bit difficult to formalize, though. And some opps get annoyed if you alert too much.