[sakuragi]

Bd 6

[diana_eva]

I think it was a decent contract. Even if it goes

1C - 1H
3H - 3N

You'd probably not pull it. Just unlucky.

I find the lead interesting. Why small from QJTxx ?

[cherdano]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-24, 08:16, said:

I find the lead interesting. Why small from QJTxx ?

I think it's clearly the right lead at IMPs. You probably aren't beating this with one diamond trick. And since you have only one entry, you are very unlikely to run diamonds unless partner has an honour. On the other hand, if partner has Hx, then you need to lead low, or else diamonds will block if declarer Hxxx in one hand.
So leading low wins when partner has Hx. Leading high only wins when partner has precisely xxx, and he has the first entry in order to continue to suit (or in the very unlikely case that it gives declarer a trick with ♦9, AND that is his 9th trick).

[P_Marlowe]

If you look only at the N/S, you see mirror hands,
4333 on both sides, so ending up in 3NT is ok, it
is unlucky, that 3NT goes down, 4H is making.

If the auction would have gone the way Diana said,
you could chalk it up as unlucky.
As it is, North did have no clue, that he was facing
a 4333 hand with values to spare, the way he bid,
he did risks ending up in 3NT with min values, facing
a hand with a ruffing value, 4H making with 3NT having
no play.

So to sum it up: North got what he deserved, although
it was unlucky with the given set of hands.

[Mbodell]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-24, 08:16, said:

1C - 1H
3H - 3N

Is exactly the auction I'd have with myself. I think 2nt is a little odd, but certainly not in any way unreasonable and does right side the NT with the stronger hand.

[sakuragi]

In my school, 1C-1H-3H is 15-17ish 4 card ♥ support, responder could pass ....

[gwnn]

2NT denies 4 hearts in standard bidding and is also nonforcing. I don't like it at all. You have 4333 but partner might not. Let partner look for 3NT if he wants, don't make the decision for him.

[suokko]

sakuragi, on 2015-May-25, 08:59, said:

In my school, 1C-1H-3H is 15-17ish 4 card ♥ support, responder could pass ....

18-19 BAL and 14-16 5m4M are about equivalent in playing strength. Too bad quite different values work in partner's hand for both. But without any special agreement to have separate raise for 18-19 balanced with 4 card support I would stick biding 3♥.

Some like to even force to game with 18-19 balanced and 4 card support but that prevents a lot light responses looking for maximum unbalanced opener with fit. Those light responses require different thinking to bidding in other sequences too leading to situation where one simple just has to agree to a system and adjust minimum response according to what has been agreed to.

[MrAce]

2 NT by N is definitely not idiotic. It is somewhere between bad and reasonable. But if my pd;s bad bids are like this, I'd just get along fine with him/her.
I'd not bid 2 NT though personally. This is a clear 3♥ to me.

3♥ = any 4441 5431 with 14-17 or 5422 with (15)16-17 or 4333 18(19). 4432 18-19 depends on overall texture of my hand but by default I bid game in team match. And we do indeed respond light. But that does not mean I have a trash both in hcp and shape wise at the same time.

JTxx xx Qxxx xxx I pass over 1♣

QJxxx x xxxx xxx
or
JTxxxx x Qxx xxx I bid 1♠ over 1 ♣