From partner's side of the table

[kenberg]

I will be illustrating Lebensohl. Not everyone plays it, but there have been lectures on it so it seems fair to give an example.

I gave you my hand on another thread, this time I give you the hand opposite mine:

Everyone vulnerable, partner deals and opens 1NT, 15-17,  and assume for the moment that RHO bids a natural 2 .

You hold

North

9

QJ53

AQ876

T94

 

Got any good ideas? Presumably 3 is some form of Staymn, but suppose partner does not have four hearts. What then?

Ok, suppose we are playing Lebensohl. Then you can bid an immediate 3 , Stayman without a stopper.  Leb is earning its keep here since partner will know that you have four hearts and that you do not have a spade stopper. Whether or not this hand is strong enough for that action is a close call.

BUT! The above was hypothetical.  This is what really happened;

After 1NT, RHO doubled, which as they play shows a single suited hand. Now you can, and do,  bid 2 Stayman. Your LHO passes, your partner bids 2 denying a four card major, and RHO now bids 2 , showing her suit.

We have gained considerably from their conventional bid! We have settled the matter of a major suit fit, we don't have one.   But now what?

Is 3 still forcing? I say "still" because over the direct 1NT-(2 ) it would be.

After thinking about this for a while, I think it should be. After all, on this auction you could just as easily have, say,

North

9

AJ53

AQ876

T94

 

You would ten like 3 to be forcing, right? Maybe the hand belongs in 3NT, maybe in 5 , but it does not belong in 3 . Not likely anyway.

So, imo, if we play Leb after the direct 1NT- (2 ), and we do play it, then I think we should still be playing Leb after this delayed 2 .

So let's assume so. You can now bid a direct 3 , forcing to game, or a slow 3 by way of Lebensohl. Partner will usually pass this but since you chose to bid 2 over the X partner will figure you have at least something, so he might sometimes go on. Or so I think.

I think I would choose the slow route and sign off in 3 .

The hands  could have been:

	North 9 QJ52 AQ876 T94
West  AKQ873 K97 J3 86		East J65   642 T95 J532
	South T42 AT8 K42 AKQ7

 

Then 5 rolls in.


The hands were:

	North 9 QJ52 AQ876 T94
West  AKQ873 K97 J 863		East J65   642 T953 J52
	South T42 AT8 K42 AKQ7

 
Oh well.

This hand, I think, shows Lebensohl at its best. There are still choices to be made, no way to avoid that.  But if the N hand is a bit better then surely we want ot be in 5 , if it is a little worse then clearly we want to be in 3 On the hands as they are, I think stopping in 3 is fine.
 

[OliverC]

If you're going to use Lebensohl over 1NT (and over Partner's takeout double of their Weak Two openings), then please consider using Transfer Lebensohl rather than normal Lebensohl, because it is much, much better. Any version of Lebensohl is better than not using it at all, of course, but Transfer Lebensohl does get over some of the short-comings of standard Leb:


I'm not going to go into all of the ins and outs of it here and now, but please have a look at http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/Leb.php for a complete explanation of both types and why Transfer Lebensohl is loads better.

[kenberg]

There are many things that I have not optimized or even looked as seriously.  I know transfer Leb has become popular and I expect that there are good reasons for it. But it might have to stand in line.

The hand posted illustrates what I think is a more primitive problem. Very often the interference over 1NT is not a direct one-suited natural overcall. In the case at hand, the issues is how to take maximal advantage of the opponent's need to start with X instead of a simple 2 . Another case is when they come in with 2 over 1NT. This might be natural, it might be DONT, it might be Capp, it might be Landy, etc. Here we are still usually on pretty solid ground, X is Stayman  and transfers are on. It gets trickier if the artificial call is higher. If 2 shoes the majors then presumably nobody cares about stops so we have to work out what shows what there.

I'll take a look at the website you give.

In the auction we had, 1NT-X-2 - P 2 - 2 there are interesting possibilities.  opener is known to have at least four cards in at least one minor, but still there are issues. I have to run but I will get back to this.

[OliverC]

The general rule against unspecified 1-suited overcalls is very simple, Ken.

1NT - (X) - ??

If this is a DONT or Brozel style double, there's absolutely no need for Responder to do anything immediately over the Double if he has decent values, because sure as eggs is eggs, they'll get another chance to bid:

1NT - (X) - No - (2 )
No - (2 ) - ??

Now they can come in with whatever bid they like, depending on which version of Lebensohl they are playing. Playing Xfer Leb, they'd bid 3 , which is the fast cue-bid of Spades (Transferring into their Spade suit), showing game values, 4-card Hearts but no stop. If Opener doesn't have 4-card Hearts and doesn't fancy 3NT, they'll probably bid 4 , over which Responder can bid 5 , which looks cold as mutton on the cards shown.

Same applies in this instance if you're playing normal Leb, except that Responder will bid 3 over 2 , Transfer Leb gives you a more specific alternative to the cue-bidding sequence, though, which is

1NT - (X) - No - (2 )
No - (2 ) - 3 (Xfer to ) - (No)
3 - (No) - 3 (GF with 4-5+ in the red suits)

[kenberg]

No need to act over the X maybe,  but I think I often would choose to do so.  I like the 2 Stayman call. By the time the DONT bidder got to her 2 call  we had already established that we did not have a major suit fit.  We could then, if we had the agreements,  concentrate effectively  on the minors.  In this case responder judged that he did not want to force to game. A good choice as the cards lay. So., with agreement that Leb is still on,  he could bid 2NT and then, after my 3 , bid 3 . What actually happened was that he just bid 3 which I took to be invitational, just as he had intended. but upon reflection I think it should be forcing. He could have a stronger hand and then he clearly wants to force.

He had five diamonds and three clubs. On a different day he could be 4-4 in the minors. Then, over 2 when we have established no heart fit, with decent values he could bid a Leb 3NT.  If I, the opener, can control spades I pass, if I cannot control spades then I bid a 4 card minor. 

It doesn't solve everything but it seems pretty flexible.  On some bad days I might be 3=3=2=5 when partner bids 3 as he did here. A problem but we might survive.  I could try 3 if I have a strong 3 card holding. In fact a couple of pairs were in 4 here. Or I could try 4 over 3 . This must be the 3=3=2=5 shape and partner can choose as he thinks best.
 
I guess here is a way to put it. If we wait until the 2 call to act then we might belong in part score or game in any of three suits and maybe in NT. When we come in with 2 over the X, then after 2 we know we could belong in part score or game in either of two suits or NT. Just on general principles this latter case should be easier to sort out, whatever the methods.

[OliverC]

Fair enough, but you're potentially denying yourself the information (which could be fairly crucial, especially if you don't find a fit) as to where Opp's long suit is

For example

1NT - (X=DONT) - 2 (Stayman) - Pass
2 - Pass - ??

Now you have no idea where the DONT doubler's suit is. You might assume it is in one particular suit, but you can never be absolutely certain. If you wait, however, you now have your Staymanic Lebensohl 3NT and cue-bids available and can show or deny stops in their suit in the process. If you've no idea where their suit is, you have no such option and are effectively bidding blind.