[Creeksider]

There are times when we're pretty much forced to make a bid that incorrectly describes a hand, but this is not one of them. GIB overcalls, promising 5 cards in the suit when holding 4 . . . and did this at every table where it had the opportunity. I can only guess that GIB has a bug that makes it appear necessary to bid in this situation, when in fact pass is mandatory.

Handviewer link

[BunnyGo]

 Creeksider, on 2011-October-25, 10:09, said:

There are times when we're pretty much forced to make a bid that incorrectly describes a hand, but this is not one of them. GIB overcalls, promising 5 cards in the suit when holding 4 . . . and did this at every table where it had the opportunity. I can only guess that GIB has a bug that makes it appear necessary to bid in this situation, when in fact pass is mandatory.

Handviewer link

To be honest, I don't hate a 1♥ bid by North. I'm not sure I would do it, but I wouldn't say anything to my partner if he bid it. In fact, it's interesting to see GIB make a "creative" bid for lead direction and obstruction on a 4 card suit with honors. I'm a little impressed that the programmers have managed something like that.

[BunnyGo]

double post

[Creeksider]

Well there's a point of view I hadn't considered. To me the bid isn't creative, it's simply wrong. I can't see the benefit of misleading partner this way. What's more, the fact that GIB made this bid at every table indicates it was due to a bug rather than the artificial intelligence feature that relies on random deals. In any event, I'm pretty sure GIB doesn't think in terms of what bid might have lead-directing value. Of course my opinion is likely colored by the fact that the bid led me into an unmakeable contract.

[Bbradley62]

Similar overcall by GIB on Monday...

---

[Bbradley62]

In OP's hand, I'm more surprised by GIB's second bid than I am by his first. The explanation of 2♦ includes "14 total points"; I presume that's because this is a game try opposite South's 10-11 total points, so GIB would have signed off with 9-13 and would have bid game with 15-19. If North is going to make a game try knowing that he's already overcalled his 4-card major, wouldn't 2N be the better invite, to include the possibility of 3N instead of 4♥?

[barmar]

GIB's 4-card overcalls usually seem to follow the guideline that you can usually get away with it with length in opener's suit. Bradley's example seems like an abberation, but Creeksider's is pretty normal.

[Creeksider]

 barmar, on 2011-October-26, 02:44, said:

GIB's 4-card overcalls usually seem to follow the guideline that you can usually get away with it with length in opener's suit. Bradley's example seems like an abberation, but Creeksider's is pretty normal.

Is this a generally accepted guideline, or merely a GIB tendency? My understanding is that you're promising 5 when you overcall, and partner should be able to rely on that promise. Am I mistaken regarding the nature of this rule? Is it something weaker, like normally expect 5 cards? We aren't talking here about some extraordinarily strong four-carder that might play as strong as a normal five-carder, so I don't see why it would make sense to put partner on a path that could lead to an unmakeable game.

[gwnn]

When you have like a balanced 12 count with a chunky 4 card major but only a doubleton in the other major, it's better to bid 1M than to pass or other calls (like double with a lack of tolerance for the other major or 1NT with 3 points less than normal).

The main benefits are the ability of playing a good 2M partscore instead of defending some other partscore, a sign of life (encouragement for partner to bid his suit) and a nice lead direct. Also it disturbs their auction a little, something that is always welcome. It is true that sometimes partner raises too high because he expects us to have 5 (and he's right 99% of the time), those would be the bad cases.

[the_dude]

 Creeksider, on 2011-October-27, 08:01, said:

Is this a generally accepted guideline, or merely a GIB tendency? My understanding is that you're promising 5 when you overcall, and partner should be able to rely on that promise. Am I mistaken regarding the nature of this rule? Is it something weaker, like normally expect 5 cards? We aren't talking here about some extraordinarily strong four-carder that might play as strong as a normal five-carder, so I don't see why it would make sense to put partner on a path that could lead to an unmakeable game.

Overcalling on a 4 card suit when you have a good hand, good suit, and length in RHO suit *is* a generally accepted stratagem by advanced+ players. Even more so at matchpoints.

I didn't realize GIB would do this - with the OP hand I think it is a winning bid and would have made it myself.

That being said .. pushing to a thin game in a 4-3 fit is a *bad* matchpoint strategy. When you find a good 4-3 fit, you have already beaten the field, there's no need to gild the lily by bidding 4.

[Creeksider]

Thanks for the responses. Summing up, it appears that among better players, a four-card overcall is acceptable in some situations, and GIB apparently has this possibility built into its logic but not the rollover description of its bid.

[Creeksider]

And as a coda to the discussion, immediately afterward I played this hand where a four-card overcall led to a top score by disrupting opponents' bidding:

Handviewer link

[gwnn]

Pass from north on that hand should be reported, btw.

[Bbradley62]

 Creeksider, on 2011-October-27, 10:37, said:

And as a coda to the discussion, immediately afterward I played this hand where a four-card overcall led to a top score by disrupting opponents' bidding:

Handviewer link

You did two things to earn your good score, but disrupting their auction was not really one of them: you defended well (I presume) because you set 3♦ whereas others allowed it to make, but primarily what you did was avoid making a takeout double, which leads to a disaster.

---

Should we start a new thread to ask about that 3♣ bid?

http://online.bridge...username=myprac

[Bbradley62]

Wow! All sorts of bizarreness on this hand. Yes, North has 20- total points. Who forgot to double?

---

[barmar]

 Creeksider, on 2011-October-27, 10:00, said:

Thanks for the responses. Summing up, it appears that among better players, a four-card overcall is acceptable in some situations, and GIB apparently has this possibility built into its logic but not the rollover description of its bid.

Which is not much different from humans. If you ask any bridge player what an overcall shows, they'll say a 5-card suit. And their partners generally respond as if that's what they expect, raising with 3 and competing to the 3 level with 4. The point is that sometimes judgement tells you to diverge from your agreements. It's only a slight deviation, so it's not a psyche.

I'm sure there's a couple of paragraphs in Lawrence's book on overcalls about it.

[Bbradley62]

 Creeksider, on 2011-October-27, 10:00, said:

Thanks for the responses. Summing up, it appears that among better players, a four-card overcall is acceptable in some situations, and GIB apparently has this possibility built into its logic but not the rollover description of its bid.

Is this something that was added in the last update or two? I cannot find any four-card overcalls before these, and I think this is something that someone would have pointed out somewhere along the line.

[calm01]

Oh happy days! Thanks for the money.

Opponents overcalling on 4 card suits at the one level (and 70%+ of the time paying the price) is what helped me get through college without worrying about where the rent or my next meal was coming from. But I admit the opponents standard of declarer play was generally not that hot, but then neither was mine.

They often lost control in the play when their partner raised on 3 - especially when playing in a 3-3 fit after being forced as they did not have the declarer skills to handle even a 4-3 fit or just as often ended up declaring a hand when it was better to defend.

If their declaring skills for 4-3 fits were up to the job, then their defending skills were also at a higher level and so would usually benefit from defending with defensive hands!

If all you have to say is to use a 4 card suit overcall on a hand unsuited to double for takeout, you basically have a defensive hand unsuited to a 1NT overcall and can pass and wait for a decent partner to protect if it is your sides hand.

Yes, I know being declarer gives you an significant edge at bridge but unless you are Ron Klinger or a member of the Italian Blue team with outsize declaring skills you often end up declaring more often with a hand better suited to defend with.

Yes, I have played at a bridge club where some players just can't defend for toffee or just hate defending - so they overcall with abandon and so end up losing that way instead most of the time.

Sputnik doubles existed even in my youth and so it was not really much disruption to overcall at the one level even with 1 spade.

Overcalling on 4 card suits at the one level carries bidding frequency benefits as opposed to bridge value. For some the this carries a high psychological value and this seems to outweigh, for them, the actual bridge benefit.

It is this longstanding habit of employing 4 card overcalls without the associated declarer skills that continues to fill my wallet when playing for profit - the happy days just go on and on.

Thanks for the money.

calm01

[Antrax]

 barmar, on 2011-October-27, 17:47, said:

I'm sure there's a couple of paragraphs in Lawrence's book on overcalls about it.

Sorry if you were sarcastic and I missed it, but yes, the Lawrence book on overcalls does advocate it quite strongly in some situations.

[gwnn]

calm01 no need to be rude. Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of top players today do bid 1M on 4 whenever they have a suitable hand and a suitable suit. I was trying to make a sketch of a case for it, you should try to read that post instead of just assuming what my/our reasons are.