[mtvesuvius]

All NV at IMPs you hold:

Qxxx
Tx
AQJx
AKx

(1♦) - P - (2♠*) - ?

*Weak

[rbforster]

Why am I annoyed? They bid my 2 longest suits... perhaps they will get to play there. If partner wants to double with his spade shortness, then I'll probably bid 3N.

[Echognome]

Seems to me like an easy pass. Maybe you will color me yellow, but I would have passed as well over a 1♠ response.

[JLOL]

2N

[the hog]

Easy pass. Partner passed over 1D after all.

[Phil]

I pass although 2N could be right.

[andy_h]

I'm up for 2NT.

[Hanoi5]

I think I pass. Partner didn't bid 1♥ or 2♣.

[whereagles]

Very easy pass.

LHO is short in spades, thus long in diamonds. Pard must therefore be short in diamonds and, since he didn't act over 1♦, he's broke.

Justin's 2NT gets a LOL from me...

[Gerben42]

2NT is LOL

Pass is obvious, they are bidding your best suits, be happy!

[655321]

whereagles, on May 6 2009, 04:44 AM, said:

LHO is short in spades, thus long in diamonds. Pard must therefore be short in diamonds and, since he didn't act over 1♦, he's broke.

Thanks. I am having trouble following these words. To help me understand, would you be able to put them into numbers?

LHO has ... of the 3 missing spades - leaving ... for partner.
LHO has ... of the 9 missing diamonds (RHO having ... diamonds, and partner ...)
Partner therefore has a ???? shape. He would have bid with this shape and 9 HCP, did not bid, therefore is 'broke' (has less than 9 points).


Anyway, in the meantime put me down for 2NT.

[whereagles]

hum.. well, reasoning goes like this: ("-->" = "hints at")

RHO long spades + we long spades -->
LHO short spades -->
LHO long diamonds + we long diamonds -->
pard short diamonds -->
pard short diamonds + pard no bid --> pard is broke

If I had to guess, I'd say shapes across are something like..

.........2524
1453..........6223
.........4243

Or thereabouts. One could run a simulation, though.

[655321]

OK, serves me right for trying to be subtle.

Whereagles, my point was that your chain of reasoning, without numbers, proves nothing. All of the links in your chain are correct, but your conclusion (partner must be short in diamonds, and is therefore 'broke' because he passed 1♦) is way too strong. (As well as suggesting to me that partner would have made a takeout double with values and a singleton diamond, when we know that his spades are too short for a takeout double).

Partner is likely to have 2 or 3 diamonds, as well as 1 or 2 spades. I agree that 2524 is his single most likely shape, amongst the many possible shapes he can hold. But there are many hands with 2 or 3 diamonds, and reasonable values where he would pass over 1♦.

I think it will usually be hard for them to double even when we are in trouble (the weak hand with the long spades has no entry, and the opening bidder doesn't have the AQJ in the suit he opened), and that we will have a chance at 3NT often enough that I want to bid here.

[helene_t]

JLOL, on May 6 2009, 02:53 AM, said:

2N

You promised to stop drinking, Justin.

[JLOL]

LOL at people LOLing 655321 and me.

[paulg]

Echognome

[jdonn]

I would have instinctively passed without even thinking much about it, but admittedly I don't have much experience in this spot. Now that I'm seeing the 2NT bids.... I don't know. I agree it's not that likely to be doubled, and we could have a game but I think it's a fair amount more likely we don't. Color me chicken I still pass. But I'm not LOLing anyone.

[Echognome]

jdonn, on May 6 2009, 07:36 AM, said:

<snip> Color me chicken I still pass. But I'm not LOLing anyone.

And pray tell what color is that? Whitish yellow?

[Phil]

( @ r () $ # @ r ()

[Trumpace]

655321, on May 6 2009, 09:31 AM, said:

OK, serves me right for trying to be subtle.

Whereagles, my point was that your chain of reasoning, without numbers, proves nothing. All of the links in your chain are correct, but your conclusion (partner must be short in diamonds, and is therefore 'broke' because he passed 1♦) is way too strong. (As well as suggesting to me that partner would have made a takeout double with values and a singleton diamond, when we know that his spades are too short for a takeout double).

Partner is likely to have 2 or 3 diamonds, as well as 1 or 2 spades.  I agree that 2524 is his single most likely shape, amongst the many possible shapes he can hold.  But there are many hands with 2 or 3 diamonds, and reasonable values where he would pass over 1♦.

I think it will usually be hard for them to double even when we are in trouble (the weak hand with the long spades has no entry, and the opening bidder doesn't have the AQJ in the suit he opened), and that we will have a chance at 3NT often enough that I want to bid here.

How many 2524 hands will partner have, where he won't overcall 1H (or something else other than pass) over 1D and we have a 3NT?