[whereagles]

Hi all,

Try this one from this week-end's cup final IMPs match. Expert pard and opps, of course

---

2♠ = muiderberg: weak two-suiter, spades-minor 5-4 or better.

As you can see, 6NT is cold. Our best effort was

2♠ 3♦ pass 3NT
(all pass)

I bid 3NT after like 3 minutes in the tank. Not very proud of it, but at table I couldn't figure out how to discover whether pard had the key cards, so I settled for a calm 3NT. Also, I reasoned pard, who is short in spades, might have had a considerably weaker hand for the overcall, say same hand without the club king, for instance.

At the other table it went

2♠ 2NT pass 4NT
pass 6NT

Easy bidding Despite this setback, my team still won in the end. We're now cup champions, yay!

[gnasher]

After a 3♦ overcall, I think you should support diamonds. Partner doesn't need all that to make 6♦ cold - x KQx KQJxxx xxx would be enough. Something like
(2♠)
3♦-3♠
3NT-4♣
4♦-4♥
4NT-etc

[andy_h]

Agree with gnasher. It's a very good hand in support of diamonds and I highly doubt that the 5level is in danger.

[Yu18772]

Partner also doesn't overcall on x, Kxx, KQxxx, Qxx....so what gnasher said.

[whereagles]

Thx guys. I was indeed a bit pessimistic, but the point is that I couldn't figure out how to disentagle whether pard had extras or not (we're not playing stuff like "last train").

Still, I should bid 3♠. If pard has a spade stop the suit is under control and I can proceed with a 4♦ slam try.

[hrothgar]

Is anyone tempted by a 2NT overcall rather than 3D?

It describes range and protects the two Kx on the opening lead.

There are a lot of reasons why I don't like 2N...
Most noteable, if a NT contract goes wrong, its going to go very very wrong.

Even so, I wonder if the pros outweigh the cons

[pooltuna]

gnasher, on 2011-April-11, 07:58, said:

After a 3♦ overcall, I think you should support diamonds. Partner doesn't need all that to make 6♦ cold - x KQx KQJxxx xxx would be enough. Something like
(2♠)
3♦-3♠
3NT-4♣
4♦-4♥
4NT-etc

EDIT: thinking 2♠ shows a 6 card suit but probably not so 6♦ has a significantly reduced probability of going down

[gnasher]

whereagles, on 2011-April-12, 08:52, said:

Thx guys. I was indeed a bit pessimistic, but the point is that I couldn't figure out how to disentagle whether pard had extras or not (we're not playing stuff like "last train").

That's often a problem in cramped auctions like this one. The normal solution is to start describing your hand and see what happens. If you make a slam try and partner has extras, maybe he'll take control (as he would here), or maybe he'll tell you enough about his hand for you to be able to make a decision.

[Fluffy]

if north takes control there is some danger on ending in the wrong slam


congrats Nuno!

[whereagles]

hrothgar, on 2011-April-12, 09:01, said:

Is anyone tempted by a 2NT overcall rather than 3D?

It describes range and protects the two Kx on the opening lead.

There are a lot of reasons why I don't like 2N...
Most noteable, if a NT contract goes wrong, its going to go very very wrong.

Even so, I wonder if the pros outweigh the cons

At the other table they did it. Check OP.

@gnasher and gonzalo: thx!

[cherdano]

whereagles, on 2011-April-11, 07:49, said:

after like 3 minutes in the tank.

Maybe that was the problem. We have three aces, an unbalanced hand and 5-card support for partner's 3-level overcall. I would indeed have to think 3 minutes before anything except raising him would occur to me.

[whereagles]

Maybe the problem is next time pard might have

Kx
Kx
KQJTxx
xxx

and I don't really see how we're going to stop short of slam if I start making strong bids.

[gnasher]

whereagles, on 2011-April-12, 16:28, said:

Maybe the problem is next time pard might have

Kx
Kx
KQJTxx
xxx

and I don't really see how we're going to stop short of slam if I start making strong bids.

I don't think partner should take control with an aceless minimum like that - think what he needs from you for slam. The most he might do is cue-bid spades at some point. If cue-bidding establishes that you have all the suits controlled, but one of you still signs off, the other one will know that the problem is a shortage of winners.

[whereagles]

Perhaps that will work, perhaps not.

Still, this example shows there is a need to have some sort of agreement on cue-bidding sequences. Last train is fine, but a bit messy. Perhaps something simpler like:

1st step = min hand, no slam interest
2nd step = cue, good hand in context

That could lead to an auction like

(2♠)
3♦ 3♠
3NT 4♦
4♠ 4NT
5♦ 6♦

3♠ = ask for stop or just a strong hand
3NT = game before slam
4♦ = strong hand, slam try in diamonds
4♠ = good hand in context (without ♣KQ would have bid 4♥ and responder signs-off in 5♦)
etc...

If overcaller had bid, instead of 4♠,

4NT = good hand, RKCB. Taking charge
5♣ = good hand, club cue, no spade cue
5♦ = good hand, HEART cue, no spade or club cue

Even easier is to raise to game to show lack of interest, but that can complicate advancer's task if he does have a monster. Anyway, food for thought.