[MrAce]

6-

---

Imps, 3rd seat openings can be as light as 1 level overcall by agreement.

[jillybean]

pass, slowly

[Hanoi5]

jillybean, on 2011-September-04, 18:51, said:

pass, slowly

I suppose the slowly part was a joke.

[jmcw]

Pass and pass again if you get the chance.

[gnasher]

The answer depends on how light a one-level overcall can be. I'll assume that this means something like a 5332 8-count with a reasonable suit.

If the auction started

(1♦) 1♠ (4♦)

I would pass, so arguably I should pass here.

On the other hand, most players won't have lots of defence for 4♦, so the opponents' bidding makes it more likely that partner has a real opening bid. If I pass, I can't expect partner to act again with a decent but not strong opening like AKQxx KQJx xx xx. I'd double.

If that turns out badly because partner has a pile of junk, that's a consequence of the methods. When you decided to play such wide-range openings, you accepted that your accuracy would be reduced, especially in competition. Presumably you also decided that the benefits justify this cost.

[JLOGIC]

I would just pass regardless of partners seat.

[whereagles]

Well, I'm gonna bid 4S. I might look silly, but that's life.

[phil_20686]

gnasher, on 2011-September-05, 01:58, said:

The answer depends on how light a one-level overcall can be. I'll assume that this means something like a 5332 8-count with a reasonable suit.

If the auction started

(1♦) 1♠ (4♦)

I would pass, so arguably I should pass here.

On the other hand, most players won't have lots of defence for 4♦, so the opponents' bidding makes it more likely that partner has a real opening bid. If I pass, I can't expect partner to act again with a decent but not strong opening like AKQxx KQJx xx xx. I'd double.

If that turns out badly because partner has a pile of junk, that's a consequence of the methods. When you decided to play such wide-range openings, you accepted that your accuracy would be reduced, especially in competition. Presumably you also decided that the benefits justify this cost.

This argument confuses me, If I double, might I not end up in 5C when 4S is better? it seems like if you are going to bid 4S should be it. What would you bid opposite the dble with a 5-3-1-4 shape? 5C surely?

[gnasher]

phil_20686, on 2011-September-06, 11:59, said:

This argument confuses me, If I double, might I not end up in 5C when 4S is better? it seems like if you are going to bid 4S should be it. What would you bid opposite the dble with a 5-3-1-4 shape? 5C surely?

My idea was that double allows partner to pass with a balanced hand.

I'm not sure what partner would do with 5314. 5♣ seems very committal.

[gnasher]

phil_20686, on 2011-September-06, 11:59, said:

This argument confuses me, If I double, might I not end up in 5C when 4S is better? it seems like if you are going to bid 4S should be it. What would you bid opposite the dble with a 5-3-1-4 shape? 5C surely?

My idea was that double allows partner to pass with a balanced hand.

I'm not sure what partner would do with 5314. 5♣ seems very committal, but nothing sounds quite right.

[karlson]

gnasher, on 2011-September-06, 13:11, said:

My idea was that double allows partner to pass with a balanced hand.

I'm not sure what partner would do with 5314. 5♣ seems very committal, but nothing sounds quite right.

I think partner should bid 4♥ with that shape. The risk of playing a 3-3 fit is quite small (2335 is the only really plausible shape (and maybe with some of those doubler bids 4s anyway?)) and a 4-3 fit with the short diamond in the right hand is probably as much as we can ask for.

[gszes]

pass and if p reopens with x bid 4s

[MrAce]

This hand was interesting for me. I asked because i really wanted what u guys would do. I passed at the table and bid 4♠ when pd DBLED. However i am not sure if someone else would DBL with pd's hand, u make the decision.

---

[JLOGIC]

I would definitely pass it out with your partners hand.

[gnasher]

I think your partner was very lucky. What was he going to do if you bid 4♥? (He probably thinks he was unlucky to go two down in 4♠ on a defensive crossruff, but in my view that's just the Card Gods restoring equity.)

[JLOGIC]

Hah, I didn't notice 4S was down...I thought I was admitting I would defend 4D cold for 4S. Now combined with the other thread I look like a super resulter

[han]

On this hand I agree with the Texan result merchant. I would have passed with our hand (but I like gnasher's double better than 4S) and I would definitely pass with partner's hand.

In general though, when partner opens in third and RHO preempts, I don't spend much energy worrying that partner could be weak.

(Similarly, if partner opens in third and RHO overcalls 1NT, I don't spend much energy worrying that partner could have a full opening.)

[MrAce]

han, on 2011-September-08, 05:35, said:

In general though, when partner opens in third and RHO preempts, I don't spend much energy worrying that partner could be weak.

I agree with you. The reason i mentioned it was, i thought respond by this hand was not auto even if pd opened in 1st seat to begin with and that now there is a possibility that he may not even have an opener.