[hrothgar]

Couple quick notes:

I don't think that you be sure that the partner of the preempted is weak.
They could have a relatively strong hand with no fit...

If you start with a double with this sort of hand, you aren't going to easily be able to show a chunky 4 card spade suit. (It would be nice if you could, but you need some way to show the strong single suited hand)

[AL78]

pilowsky, on 2021-May-13, 17:27, said:

Here's the entire hand and auction. Matchpoints btw.
Earlier that day, my partner sent me a message saying a friend had 'dropped' for tea, so Lebensohl was on my mind.
I thought that the double meant she had a strong hand with no decent 5-card suit to overcall with.
One of the lines that I took away from Lawrence on Takeout Doubles was "a five-card suit is gold".
I know there were 300+ more pages to the book and even stuff not covered, but with that in mind, I assumed my partner lacked a 5-card suit and had lots of points.
The 3♠ bid surprised me, and I assumed North had a strong hand with four chunky spades - so I left it.

Double-dummy suggests 3NT is optimal, but the top 6 pairs were in 4♠+1.
The bidding on the 4♠ tables reflects the results of the poll:
On five tables, West opened 2♥. One person overcalled 3♠, Three people overcalled 2♠, and one person doubled (followed by 3♦ 3♠ 4♠)
West opened 1♥ at two tables, making it easier for NS to reach 4♠.
Afterwards, I decided that since EW and I were all weak, I should have taken my partner to be much stronger than I imagined.

---

I would have overcalled 3♠ (if you wait for the perfect hand, you might as well take SJO over a weak two off your card), but if 2NT was Lebensohl, 3♠ shows a strong hand with a spade suit, so South has an easy raise to 4♠.

[helene_t]

pilowsky, on 2021-May-13, 17:27, said:

Afterwards, I decided that since EW and I were all weak, I should have taken my partner to be much stronger than I imagined.

No, opps don't have to be weak. They could both have up to 11 points.

But partner has shown a monster hand with 5+ spades, so you should raise.

In general, it is better to trust partner than to trust opps. Even if partner is a less reliable person than opps. Fon one thing, partner tries to give you the information you need while opps try to conceal it. Another reason is that there's only one partner who could distort his hand, but two opps.

And of course, partner may be upset if you don't trust them, while opps will be perfectly OK with you not trusting them.

Btw if you play Lebensohl, you should start with 3♦. Then partner's 3♠ bid would be forcing. But here it doesn't matter, you will reach 4♠ regardless of methods and regardless of North's choice. If North just overcalls 2♠, South should invite and North will of course accept.

[eagles123]

...

[apollo1201]

helene_t, on 2021-May-13, 19:04, said:

If North just overcalls 2♠, South should invite and North will of course accept.

A good player corrected me in a simillar sequence, that it was (technically) not an invite.
But you, a good player from what I read from your other posts, use that terminology.
Maybe it is a question of native speaker (I guess he was, I am not, I don’t know for you).
Courtesy raise is the word?
Or it is a different strength vs an unopposed invite (from a good 10 to a bad 12)?
If you know, I’m happy to learn. After all, improving one’s bridge is not only masterizing new squeezes techniques or conventions, it is also using the appropriate terms!😃

[TylerE]

It's not a limit raise, but it's, well, invitational. The lower limit of 2♠ on this auction is at least marginally higher than a 1♠ opening.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2021-May-13, 12:39, said:

Or maybe even struggle to make 1.

Do you really believe that is likely? I would guess punting game to be quite reasonable in probability terms, even at MP.

johnu, on 2021-May-13, 12:44, said:

I would immediately get another partner if they passed 2♠ with that hand. Apologies in advance if I boot you from the table if you do something like this

You either weren't thinking or just looking for a Strawman argument here
Nowhere did I suggest anyone would pass anything, nor for that matter that 2♠ was not a good bid if it fits your agreements better than 3♠ does.
My point was just that being able to construct a hand consistent with a certain result does not make that result likely (and implicitly that I think making 12 is at least as likely as struggling to make 1).

[TylerE]

pescetom, on 2021-May-14, 08:31, said:

Do you really believe that is likely? I would guess punting game to be quite reasonable in probability terms, even at MP.

It's not really THAT unlikely. Just need partner to have no kings, and get a 4-1 spade break.

[helene_t]

apollo1201, on 2021-May-14, 06:22, said:

A good player corrected me in a simillar sequence, that it was (technically) not an invite.

Maybe that person would call 3♠ a "constructive raise" and 3♥ and "invite"?

In this sequence I would call both invites, assuming we have the agreement that 3♥ is the stronger invite.

But I am not even sure if 3♥ by a passed hand should promise support.

[DavidKok]

apollo1201, on 2021-May-14, 06:22, said:

A good player corrected me in a simillar sequence, that it was (technically) not an invite.
But you, a good player from what I read from your other posts, use that terminology.
Maybe it is a question of native speaker (I guess he was, I am not, I don’t know for you).
Courtesy raise is the word?
Or it is a different strength vs an unopposed invite (from a good 10 to a bad 12)?
If you know, I’m happy to learn. After all, improving one’s bridge is not only masterizing new squeezes techniques or conventions, it is also using the appropriate terms!😃

I think the term 'courtesy raise' only applies if the hand showing the long suit is unlimited. For example 1♣-(1♠)-2♥ (forcing)-(P); ?, where opener has a mandatory raise with 3-card support and a minimum (or, I suppose, even on the simple auction 1♥-(1♠)-?, where responder should raise on approximately 4-7 HCP). In the context of a limited hand I believe 'competitive raise' is the normal description, which is typically not invitational.

helene_t, on 2021-May-14, 19:11, said:

Maybe that person would call 3♠ a "constructive raise" and 3♥ and "invite"?

In this sequence I would call both invites, assuming we have the agreement that 3♥ is the stronger invite.

But I am not even sure if 3♥ by a passed hand should promise support.

This is exactly what these bids would mean in my partnership. If, as the passed hand, you don't have spades, no heart stop and no minor suit just pass. On a disaster hand like 2=3=4=4 with 11 points either roll over ("well done opps!") or fudge with 3♣ ("I had a spade in with my clubs").

[pilowsky]

Can't say I'm not a quick learner.
This hand came up in the Club today with the same partner.
This time I was ready.

---

[helene_t]

It looks like EW don't play Lebensohl? But even so, East's pass over 4!S is probably forcing, so pass shows that he's not sure about 5!h?

[pilowsky]

helene_t, on 2021-May-20, 15:40, said:

It looks like EW don't play Lebensohl? But even so, East's pass over 4!S is probably forcing, so pass shows that he's not sure about 5!h?

Apologies - the hand came from the Club.
I was East and my (better) partner was West.
Afterwards, I was (slightly) admonished for not bidding Lebensohl.
After the original hand, I figured any bid at all would be forcing and I could take it from there - "Pilowskysohl" perhaps?