Overcalls

 

Some questions for your partnership:

  - Are your overcalls fast and loose or are they relatively sound?  And is suit quality an issue (we really think it should be, Partner will often end up on lead, we'd like our marginal overcalls to at least have some lead-directional value)?  And what is the top-end of a suit overcall?

  - Once your side has overcalled, what are your methods?  Especially, is a new suit forcing?  Or is it merely constructive?

 

                              7th December, 2011                 E-W Vul

 

 

                                     6th January, 2010               None Vul

 

 

                                     3rd June, 2009                    E-W Vul

 

 

                                    1st April, 2009                     None Vul

 

 

                                     4th March, 2009                 Both Vul

 

20

♠ 72 ♥ AK87 ♦ 65 ♣ KT964

West    North   East     South Pass    Pass    Pass    1♦ ??

 

Some Wests, perhaps not noticing the vulnerability, will overcall 2♣.  North passes, and now there are two ways by which dreadful things can befall E-W.  The most likely one is that South will reopen with a Double, North will pass, and West will go for -200 or -500 on a part-score hand.  Even worse, East might take a shine to his hand (he shouldn’t) and presume that West actually has some values.  If that happens then the final E-W result will be too hideous even to contemplate.

 

Other Wests, we’ll call them the enlightened ones, will overcall 1♦ with 1♥.  Yes, you will no doubt have noticed that there is a small deficit in the length of the Heart suit, but at least it is a bid which does not overstate the robustness of the Club suit, and one that tells East which suit West would like to be led.

 

                                     4th March, 2009                 E-W Vul

 

 

                                           17th January, 2007           Board 27      None Vul

 

 

Just as South was on Board 23, North is confronted with strong 8-card Heart suit, and a couple of outside cards.  We can think of three possible ways of proceeding:

-         Double:           When we double and then bid a new suit we show a very good one-suited hand.  Our hand certainly qualifies offensively, but we’d normally expect a little more defense for that sequence, and a good 5- or 6-card suit, not 8 of them.  One danger with doubling is that Partner might have a slew of Diamonds and pass 1♦ doubled.  It’s a slight risk, perhaps, but on the actual board, that is exactly what will likely happen, 1♦ doubled by West making 7 tricks, when N-S are cold for 11 tricks in Hearts!

-         4♥:                  A preemptive effort might well work well here, putting East on the spot.  The danger here is that the opponents will bid 4♠ or 5♦, giving us a guess on the next round.  Also, if we bid 4♥ when we have 3 likely defense tricks, how can Partner make any useful contribution to the auction?  For example, give her something like: ♠ 876, ♥ K743, ♦ 98732, ♣ 4, and she would be quite entitled to sacrifice all the way to the 7-level, not realizing that 6♥ is the par spot and that it the other side that is doing the sacrificing!

-         1♥:                  The slow approach gives us better chance of figuring out where the hand belongs, and we would have to say that this hand does look like a candidate for constructive bidding rather than preemptive bidding.  Needless to say, we would be somewhat miffed if 1♥ got passed out but that hardly seems likely when we have so much distribution.
 

                                           12th July, 2006                 Board 19      E-W Vul

 

 

What are the choices here?

   Pass?           No, altogether too feeble, in our opinion.

   1♠?              That's better!  Too bad we don't have a 5th Spade, though ... Partner might start doing some

                        Total Trick analysis based on us having another trump, and we might compete too high ... but

                        at least the under-tricks are only 50 apiece.

  1NT?            That would be our choice ... perhaps it's better to be a point light than a trump light!  And,

                        anyway, we all know that Aces and Tens are undervalued when it comes to counting up

                        our HCPs, so with 3 Aces and 2 useful-looking Tens, this hand is worth upgrading, don't

                        you think?

 

                                           19th July, 2006                  Board 6    E-W Vul

 

 

With such a splendid suit it may seem automatic to throw in a 2♦ bid here, but West should resolutely resist the temptation!  No good is likely to come from this bid, here are some of the things that we like our overcalls to do, which this 2♦ bid fails to accomplish:

(a) It doesn't preempt the auction ... true it deprives them of their own 2♦ bid, but in return it gives them two extra bids (Pass and Double).

(b) It doesn't compete for the part-score, the opponents are headed for game.

(c) It doesn't suggest a sacrifice, the adverse vulnerability virtually eliminates that possibility.

(d) It probably won't even have any lead-directional benefit, as the 2♣ opener is likely to be Declarer.

 

All in all, 2♦ is a waste of breath, far more likely to help the opponents than to achieve anything positive for its perpetrator.  No doubt N-S will be delighted to receive this gratuitous information, it can only help their efforts to get to the right contract.

 

                                            2nd August, 2006              Board 12    N-S Vul

 

 

Here are the choices:

  Dbl:        Let's eliminate this one right away.  We avoid take-out Doubles with hands that have less than

                 3 cards in the unbid major(s), unless we have a really strong hand, say 18 or 19+.  This hand is

                 not good enough for a short-major Double.

  Pass:      This is certainly better than a Double, but that's its only redeeming quality.

  2♣:         Probably the most popular choice ... opening values, decent suit, what could be simpler?

  1NT:      This is our choice, we must confess ... for most partnerships this shows 15-18 HCPs, and at

                 least one stopper in their suit.  True, the singleton Spade is not ideal, but we consider that a small

                 defect compared with the benefit of making a limited and descriptive bid.

 

Don't like that 1NT suggestion?  Worried that Partner will transfer to Spades?  Sure she might, but that's not necessarily a bad thing ... if she is weak, then the 5-1 (or 6-1) Spade fit might well be the best spot ... if she is stronger, we'll no doubt end up in 3NT with 5-1 Spades or 4♠ with 6-1 Spades, hopefully not untenable.  The upside for bidding 1NT here is that it makes it easier for South to bid constructively ... for example, here is the Partner's actual hand:

                 ♠ QT942

                 ♥ Q97

                 ♦ Q3

                 ♣ Q92

Opposite a 2♣ overcall, this hand can raise to 3♣, but that's the most she can do ... and if this hand does raise to 3♣, then North can hardly bid 3NT, she has no reason to expect such a suitable hand, she's more likely to be facing fewer HCPs and 4 Clubs.  However, opposite a 1NT overcall, South transfers to Spades, then bids 2NT and the No Trump game is easily reached.

 

                                           11th October, 2006           Board 13      Both Vul

 

 

Normally, an overcall shows at least a 5-card suit, of course, but there are times when an exception can be made.  The two obvious excuses for a 4-card overcall are:

-         An exceptional suit where we would really like to steer Partner in the right direction for his opening lead

-         When we are long in RHO’s suit … part of the logic here is that LHO and Partner are likely to be short in the suit, in which case Partner is in the over-ruffing position … in other words, the hand is likely to play quite well.

 

Here we have both of these excuses, and would not hesitate to overcall 1♠.

 

                                            8th November, 2006          Board 3    E-W Vul

 

 

How sound are your 2-level vulnerable overcalls?  If you would overcall 2♦ with this hand, then they are far from sound!  We wouldn’t, the suit is weak with only 5, there’s no distribution, and there are some wasted values.  But this is mostly a style thing, some people like to get into the auction quickly … others prefer sounder initial action and, as a result are more likely to balance later in the auction.  On a Soundness Scale of 1-10, we’d give this stinker about a 2, and even that is probably being generous.

 

                                            November 21st, 2007        Board 25   E-W Vul

 

 

This might look like an obvious Pass, but consider bidding 1♠ here, notwithstanding the 4-card suit.  That raises the question, “When is it OK to overcall on a 4-card suit?”  The Law of Total Tricksters will say that it’s almost never right, but we like to be a little more flexible.  Here are the two most common cases:

-         We have a stellar holding such as AKQx, and desperately want the suit led.  In the long run, the consequences of not getting that suit into the auction are likely to be more dire than the risks of lying about the length of the suit.

-         The second case is the “Mike Lawrence hand”.  In his classic from yesteryear, entitled “The Complete Book of Overcalls” he extolled the virtues of 4-card overcalls when holding length in RHO’s suit.  This hand meets that criterion, and additionally we have decent values and a reasonably strong suit, so our choice would be 1♠ here.

 

OK, you ask, where’s the logic, why does length in their suit make the 4-card overcall more appealing?  The main reason is that we can usually withstand a 3-card raise from Partner, because if (in this case) Diamond ruffs are required, they will be made in the short hand, and, furthermore, if our LHO is also short in Dimonds, we will be in the overruffing position.

 

It’s also important to get into the auction when we can, and, on the actual deal, if we don’t bid 1♠ now, our side will be shut out completely.  After we pass, LHO will bid 1NT, Partner with 8 HCP’s and 4-3-1-5 will pass, and when North also passes, we’ll have no sensible entry into the auction.  Bidding 1♠ earlier would avoid that problem!

 

                                          16th August, 2006             Board 4      Both Vul

 

 

On the previous board we discussed how the range for a 1NT overcall is lowered when in the balancing seat.  Here, opposite an overcaller, the reverse applies, we need more to bid 1NT.  If Partner opens 1♣ or 1♦ we typically need 6-10 to respond 1NT … but when Partner has merely overcalled, our bid of 1NT should be somewhat stronger, let’s say 8-11 or thereabouts.  The reason for this higher range, of course, is to compensate for the fact that an Overcaller requires fewer values than an Opener.

 

                                          16th August, 2006             Board 10       Both Vul

 

 

Our personal preference, opposite Partner’s overcall, is to play that new suits are constructive but not forcing.  Playing that style, North cannot bid 2♣, her hand is just too good.  So, what are you supposed to do when you have a really good hand opposite an overcall?  You could cue-bid, of course, but wherever possible, we like to have support for Partner when we make that bid.  So, our own choice here would be 3♣ … forcing, with Clubs … but make sure that Partner is on the same wave-length in these auctions, and that a jump in a new suit is indeed forcing, not preemptive (also a viable treatment, but then you would have to use the cue-bid to show a good hand, and not necessarily a hand with support for Partner).

 

                                          16th August, 2006             Board 22      E-W Vul

 

 

Yet another N-S decision involving methods opposite Partner's overcall.  Here are the two obvious possibilities:

(a) If N-S play that a new suit opposite an overcall is "non-forcing but constructive", then they probably also play that 2♠ here would be forcing ... it seems a shame to let that little detail shut out our Spade suit, so if we cannot bid 2♠ we would bid 3♠.

(b) If N-S play that a jump in a new suit opposite an overcall is preemptive, then that would be a reasonable choice. 

 

But, to be honest, notwithstanding the absence of a 7th Spade, we would be tempted to bid 3♠ anyway, even if we had a preemptive 2♠ at our disposal.  The hand is so perfect for preempting:

  - no defense

  - good trump fillers

  - shortness in their suit

  - a fit with Partner's suit

  - favorable vulnerability

Who could ask for more?

 

                                          27th September, 2006       Board 17      None Vul

 

 

Here is another hand where we have two cue-bids available, and one treatment that we like is to use them both as a limit raise in support of Hearts.  2♦ (the cheaper cue-bid) is used to show three-card support, and 2♠ is used to show four-card support.  Is West’s 8-count worth making a limit raise (via 2♦)?  Absolutely!  An Ace, a King, shortness in one of their suits, looks like enough to us.

 

                                          19th September, 2007       Board 8     None Vul

 

 

How do we propose to support Partner’s Diamonds?  One possibility is to preempt to 4♦ based on our 10-card fit, but we don’t like to make high-level preempts with defense in the side-suits.  Also, the absence of a short suit is another reason to be wary of preempting.  Sure, 4♦ might well work out, but we think it’s too likely that it will provoke Partner into a phantom sacrifice, so we’d rather make a constructive move.  It’s only 8 HCP’s but we’d show an invitational raise with this hand.

 

The modern style is to use jump raises for preemption and the prescribed method for an invitational raise is to cue-bid.  Here we have two cue-bids available, and the most common practice is for the cheap cue-bid to be a 3-card raise, and the expensive cue-bid to be a 4-card (or more) raise.  So, we finally got there, it’s a 2♥ bid!

 

                                            19th September, 2007       Board 32   E-W Vul

 

 

First reaction here is no doubt to raise Partner, but probably only to 2♠ considering our square hand and the vulnerability, it’s wise to hold back in these circumstances.  Are we all agreed then?  Actually, no!  We think that even 2♠ is too much, and here is why:

-         The opponents are in a forcing auction, it’s surely their hand

-         Our Heart holding is likely to be useless

-         Our Diamond holding looks more useful on defense than offense

-         We have no ruffing values, in fact we may have no tricks whatsoever for Partner

-         We do not want to encourage a Spade opening

 

Yes, we are all told to “support with support”, and no doubt our side could survive a 2♠ contract.  But, of course, the real danger is that Partner might compete to 3♠ or 4♠ and be most disappointed to receive our quite useless dummy.

 

© BES, Inc

All Rights Reserved