[losercover]

---

I learned to play bridge a long time ago and still not comfortable with unsound 2 level vulnerable overcalls. I thought it was fair to expect a reasonable hand. My partner says she can bid when she feels like it. My fault, for not cue bidding 4S to find out if her overcall was sound. If you partner overcalled 2D, what would you do with the North hand.

[Hanoi5]

I would double 3♠, maybe we can find a heart fit and play there? But I'm gonna move and try for a slam, that's fo'shizzle.

I wouldn't bid 2♦ with South's hand, not even playing aggresively. 3♦ looks better, it shows what the hand is about; and I wouldn't bid 3♦ being vulnerable.

[babalu1997]

weak jump overcall to 3d

you perhaps need a new partner

[Bbradley62]

 losercover, on 2011-June-13, 14:06, said:

My partner says she can bid when she feels like it.

If that's really what she said, then you should feel like not playing with her anymore. If she feels like bidding on this hand (and I would) then she clearly should bid 3♦.

[BunnyGo]

 losercover, on 2011-June-13, 14:06, said:

---

If you partner overcalled 2D, what would you do with the North hand.

Double 3♠. Then after the session (or hand as is your preference) I'd ask my partner why she bid 2♦. If she said "I can bid when I feel like it" then that would be my last session playing with her.

[matmat]

Not a fan of 2♦. Not really a fan of 3♦ either. Suit is nice though holy, and the hand too balanced.

with 3n,4♥, and 5-6♦ still possible double of 3♠ seems right, although a 4♠ call is not out of the question either, we have a very nice hand for a ♦ slam.

[rogerclee]

I would never bid with the south hand at this vul, looks like a normal pass to me.

Doubling with the north hand seems very bad to me, what are you guys trying to accomplish? Defending 3Sx is likely to be a disaster, and in all other cases we probably just want to play 6D. Yes slam could have no play but I don't see how we can ever not bid it.

Good practical hand evaluation by the original poster, IMO.

[jjbrr]

Agree with clee.

2♦ isn't bridge, and an excuse like "I can bid when I feel like it" is pretty hopeless. Some people just like to hear themselves make noise, I suppose.

[barmar]

It's not unsound, it's ridiculous.

Even opposite a passed partner, no reasonable player would bid 2♦ with her hand, regardless of vulnerability. It's either Pass or 3♦.

What's pretty amazing is that 6♦ has a chance with a friendly lie of the opponents' cards. If clubs are no worse than 4-2, you just have to find the ♦Q.

[billw55]

 rogerclee, on 2011-June-13, 14:47, said:

I would never bid with the south hand at this vul, looks like a normal pass to me.

Same here. 2♦ in particular is absurd. I would not call 3♦ either while vul .. but at least it's in the realm of sanity.

As for south's remark .. it shows he has no interest in including his partner on what he is doing. No need to play with him again.

[whereagles]

After 2♦ a raise to slam seems normal. Even with that load of junk across, it has chances.

[mr1303]

I remember getting told off by the England U25 coach for bidding 3D on these hands with 7 diamonds, let alone 6. Pass, pass & pass some more.

[mtvesuvius]

2♦ is ridiculous.

[JLOGIC]

the 6D bid is fine

[kenrexford]

I also agree that 6♦ is a good practical bid.

Moreover, I think 6♦ might even make on this garbage layout, on a great day. Suppose you get a spade lead and a switch to a club, the most helpful defense for you. You win the club in hand, noting the fall of the 10. Ruff a spade. Diamond Ace, hooking the diamond because RHO opened, perhaps. Now, you have six natural diamonds, a spade ruff, three clubs, and a heart, for 11 tricks. If you also find the play of floating the club 9 around, that's the 12th trick.

The same thing happens with a spade-spade attack, or a spade-trump attack, or a trump-spade-trump attack, and other variations.

[barmar]

Wow, Ken's right. I didn't notice the club spot cards earlier, I just saw the bad break. Probably the only troublesome lead is a heart.

Does this suggest that he should have bid 7♦, since 6♦ makes with a hand at least an ace below what he was expecting?

[Cyberyeti]

 kenrexford, on 2011-June-14, 12:14, said:

I also agree that 6♦ is a good practical bid.

Moreover, I think 6♦ might even make on this garbage layout, on a great day. Suppose you get a spade lead and a switch to a club, the most helpful defense for you. You win the club in hand, noting the fall of the 10. Ruff a spade. Diamond Ace, hooking the diamond because RHO opened, perhaps. Now, you have six natural diamonds, a spade ruff, three clubs, and a heart, for 11 tricks. If you also find the play of floating the club 9 around, that's the 12th trick.

The same thing happens with a spade-spade attack, or a spade-trump attack, or a trump-spade-trump attack, and other variations.

Yeah, provided the late entry is not removed by a heart switch it can be made, swap the 8 and 9 of clubs and it's always there if you read it right.

Partner can have some fairly normal 2♦ overcalls where 6♦ doesn't make, but it's a pretty good practical bid.

[ggwhiz]

I too would bid 6♦. It's a good dive against their spade game....... not what I had in mind though

[whereagles]

 barmar, on 2011-June-14, 13:18, said:

Does this suggest that he should have bid 7♦, since 6♦ makes with a hand at least an ace below what he was expecting?

maybe. which shows 4NT is the correct bid here

[Lurpoa]

 losercover, on 2011-June-13, 14:06, said:

---

I learned to play bridge a long time ago and still not comfortable with unsound 2 level vulnerable overcalls. I thought it was fair to expect a reasonable hand. My partner says she can bid when she feels like it. My fault, for not cue bidding 4S to find out if her overcall was sound. If you partner overcalled 2D, what would you do with the North hand.

♥

No, 2♦ is awfull. And also a vulnerable 3♦ bid is not good.

And indeed, 6♦ might be the practical bid in this competitive auction....

On the other side, we might have a grand slam, or might be missing 2 keycards:

4♠ or 4NT is my bid (depending on agreements with parter): at least Partner, will get the message, that we own this hand......even if they further compete with 5♠.