[Jinksy]

---

IMP pairs. Partner would have opened 11.5+ balanced or 10+ with 5431 or better distribution.

[MrAce]

I'd have never overcalled 2♣ to start with.

[nullve]

I would have doubled 1♦. (Ideal shape, out of range for 1N.)

I already hate 2♣ on a 5-card suit for much the same reason that I hate standard Precision's 2♣ opener, but 2♣ on 5C(332) makes things even worse, as those 5 clubs will then behave more like 4 trumps wrt. LoTT.

[silvr bull]

This is an easy 2C overcall for me. Overcalling 1D with 2C can create problems for East if he has one 4 card major but only a doubleton in the other, and a hand that is "too good" to pass but not strong enough to force. When partner is on lead, I prefer for him to lead a C than a major. It is also possible that partner has values and a 5 card major, so my 2C bid will make it easier for him to compete in his major. I prefer overcalling 2C than double since I have no 4 card major. Partner could be very disappointed if I double and he aggressively competes with his 4=4 majors because he is "certain" that I will have a fit for one of his suits.

I will pass the double of 2D. If E has a stiff D, he may try to rescue and get into a worse situation. If E also passes, then I should have as much defense as partner would expect.

[SteveMoe]

Double, not 2♣.
Pass now. Partners values give us the balance of power and we likely have 2♦ tricks to the good. 2N is too small a window and a contract we don't want to play. At this vlunerability if we have game values our way, we expect a lucrative penalty.

[nige1]

Jinksy, on 2017-May-14, 04:10, said:

IMP pairs. Partner would have opened 11.5+ balanced or 10+ with 5431 or better distribution.

---

Over LHO's 1♦, I rank

• Double = T/O. We might even win the auction in 1M.
• 2♣ = NAT. Committal and brave.
• Pass = NAT. But bidding is fun.

After partner's double, I rank

• Pass = NAT. Partner is interested in penalties and you have good defence,
• 2♥/♠ = NAT but be prepared to apologize.

[ggwhiz]

Since your partner would open with the kind of trash you describe should you not be pulling in the horns when they passed?

2♣ vs dbl is a debate for more mainstream opening agreements but surely this is a pass and balance (or not) hand given your agreements.

Meanwhile you have no bid over 2♦ smashed that could possibly be a playable spot so don't. You have a 4-3 major suit fit and/or a 5-2 club fit at best and partner has advertised defence.

[NickRW]

Having played a lot with partners who pointedly comment, "you didn't have 4 cards in my major" when replying to a take out X, I can sympathise with 2C. However, your partnership apparently has quite light opening tendencies and you don't have a major, so game seems pretty unlikely, so this brings pass into the realm of plausible actions, especially at imps where you don't have to strain to beat other people with your cards by the odd 10 or 20 points.

As for what to do now, pass. 2Dx could well be our last chance to go +.

[helene_t]

2♣ is fine at these colours, especially against people who play strong/5 i.e. the 1♦ opening is vulnerable to disruption.

Pass now unless we have some specific agreements about this sequence that makes this double pure take-out.

[jogs]

My takeout doubles of 1♦ promises at least 4-3 in the majors. This hand doesn't meet those requirements. Also two jacks in the majors misrepresents the location of my points.
2♣ when favorable. If vul were none, 2♣ would be allowable with pass as a close 2nd choice.

[miamijd]

I think Pass over 1D stands out. I want to know what XX meant before I advise what to do over 2DX.

2C is highly obstructive over 1D, especially if your partner can raise, because it puts a lot of strain on responder's negative X. The opponents can end up in some very bad contracts.

Here, however, your suit isn't great; you don't have extra strength and your hand is lousy for offense. 5332 hands don't produce a lot of tricks, and you have two rather useless major Jacks. Forget about responder penalty passing 2C (which would be awful). If 2C gets passed out, you won't be happy, either. If partner raises to 3 and that gets passed out, likewise (you are probably going set).

X is similarly flawed. 3325 is a poor shape for a double, because partner is going to bid to 3M with a five card major. What's even worse, however, are your actual major suit holdings. Jxx Jss is lousy. If you want to double here on 3325 (which is pretty poor), then you want to have a lot more than 2 HCP in the suits you're asking partner to bid. I certainly wouldn't quibble with a X on AQx AQx xx Jxxxx. On the hand you posit, I think X is very unwise.

So I would pass 1D. If responder raised to 2D and opener passed, I would probably reopen with a X if partner were silent.

After the negative X, you didn't tell us what XX means. Is it club support? Majors? Cards? That matters in evaluating what to do after advancer's X of 2D.

[rmnka447]

I'd probably bid 2 ♣ with this hand. IMO, this is a tactical bid. The vulnerability is favorable and 2 ♣ forces them to try to sort out a major fit starting at the 2 level. My alternative call would be pass which I certainly would do with red pockets.

I'm sitting for 2 ♦x. My hand looks to at least 3 tricks, possibly 4 if a 2nd ♣ trick comes home. Fortunately, 2 ♦ doubled making isn't yielding a game swing just 180 which would be likely be a part score swing their way. Even 2 ♦x making 3 (380) isn't a major disaster. OTOH, any set of 2 ♦ is likely going to be a very good reslult for us.

[Stefan_O]

Given the vuln, club suit-quality, and passed pd, I like 2C.
Takeout-X would also be reasonable, of course.

I PASS 2DX and lead a small spade

If we can't set 2D with this hand, I have a too ambitious pard (or we mis-defended).

[Phil]

Look at A from last months MSC.

[jogs]

Even without knowing the South hand, South's bidding is too aggressive for my taste. As a passed hand, South should want North to freely compete. It would be difficult to construct a hand where South's bidding is consistent. Imp pairs. The difference between +100 and +200 is not great. Luckily the final contract is 2D. Difference between -90 and -180 isn't great either. But I like passed hands to give partner leeway.

[wank]

you don't overcall in minors at the 2 level on weak no-trumps

you don't overcall in minors on 5332 shapes with a doubleon in the opps' suit (double)

anyway, now we should be delighted. our crap bidding on the previous round seems to have left us in prime position to collect a nice little penalty.

[MrAce]

wank, on 2017-May-16, 07:43, said:

you don't overcall in minors at the 2 level on weak no-trumps

you don't overcall in minors on 5332 shapes with a doubleon in the opps' suit (double)

Save your breath brother. I have been saying the same thing in these forums for the last 8 years. These people will tell me that I am a very aggressive bidder for bidding more with shapely hands and less hcps and will look at me weird when they see me pass with 5332 13 count. BUT...BUT it has 13 HCPS ffs!! (on this hand due to doubleton in their suit I would have chosen DBL over pass though)

It is almost impossible for most adv minus players to avoid 2♣ overcall with 13 count despite 5332 shape.
There are of course exception hands that I overcall with 5332 at 2 level where the suit quality is too good to not mention. But they are really very rare.

[Tramticket]

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 11:38, said:

Save your breath brother. I have been saying the same thing in these forums for the last 8 years. These people will tell me that I am a very aggressive bidder for bidding more with shapely hands and less hcps and will look at me weird when they see me pass with 5332 13 count. BUT...BUT it has 13 HCPS ffs!! (on this hand due to doubleton in their suit I would have chosen DBL over pass though)

It is almost impossible for most adv minus players to avoid 2♣ overcall with 13 count despite 5332 shape.
There are of course exception hands that I overcall with 5332 at 2 level where the suit quality is too good to not mention. But they are really very rare.

You are both right of course. I know this. I've read this type of advice many times. Against good players, in a strong field, I will follow this advice. So why did I vote "no, but it's close"?

The truth is that playing at the local club, I know that the field will bid 2C. I know that, even if it is wrong, the opposition won't have the methods to extract a penalty double. I also know that club players are particularly poor at defence. I will tend to get a good result when I overcall. I am sure that other I/A players follow this strategy - whether consciously or not.

I am aware that this is no way to improve .... And I have discussed the standard of our two-level overcalls with partner in detail. But we still sometimes do it

[Tramticket]

For us, South's redouble would have been "values". We would have no agreement about the double - it seems a strange action. But our default assumption, if no specific agreement, is take-out.

[Jinksy]

Tramticket, on 2017-May-16, 14:19, said:

For us, South's redouble would have been "values". We would have no agreement about the double - it seems a strange action. But our default assumption, if no specific agreement, is take-out.

This.