[Jinksy]

---

IMPs. Other responses to 2N would have shown shortage (nonmin), so if E wanted to encourage he'd have bid 3N.

The arguments each gave for their conservatism:

Spoiler

W argued that E was near the top of his HCP range, and even if the honours looked dubious in the abstract, in the context of the auction they'd be likely to find complementary honours with the strong hand, so E should have bid 3N.

E argued that with quick losers everywhere, complementary honours would be too slow a source of tricks opposite a hand that couldn't just bid game, and that although he's towards the upper end of the HCP range, W should be playing him for about 2+ points even given a negative response since the range of 2♥ is quite wide, and a the a priori odds strongly favour it over 0-1HCP, so W should have punted 4♥ immediately.

[eagles123]

Difficult one. My initial thoughts were East on the basis that I don't understand showing a 4 count as a minimum in a 0-bad 5 range, but possibly West should just bid game vul at imps.

I'm a bit torn!

Eagles

[dboxley]

Jinksy, on 2015-November-14, 05:14, said:

---

Other responses to 2N would have shown shortage (nonmin), so if E wanted to encourage he'd have bid 3N.

The arguments each gave for their conservatism:

Spoiler

W argued that E was near the top of his HCP range, and even if the honours looked dubious in the abstract, in the context of the auction they'd be likely to find complementary honours with the strong hand, so E should have bid 3N.

E argued that with quick losers everywhere, complementary honours would be too slow a source of tricks opposite a hand that couldn't just bid game, and that although he's towards the upper end of the HCP range, W should be playing him for about 2+ points even given a negative response since the range of 2♥ is quite wide, and a the a priori odds strongly favour it over 0-1HCP, so W should have punted 4♥ immediately.

Mostly West. East might have bid 3N but I, personally, would always bid 4 with the West hand. I would like to play against West for money.

[Jinksy]

dboxley, on 2015-November-14, 07:46, said:

Mostly West. East might have bid 3C but I, personally, would always bid 4 with the West hand. I would like to play against West for money.

3♣ showing a club singleton?

[wank]

Jinksy, on 2015-November-14, 07:47, said:

3♣ showing a club singleton?

that's not most people's definition of a 'feature'.

[Jinksy]

I did describe it in the OP. (ETA - changed it to be clearer)

[ggwhiz]

I voted other as in the methods. I can't blame east for treating that trash as a minimum and west is staring at a lot of potential losers given that the ♥K in the east hand should probably never treat it as a minimum.

I don't hate the methods at all but they don't suit these cards. Perhaps you could stick in an artificial bid like 3♣ to show modest interest as a transfer of responsibility.

[mike777]

blame mostly west.

some blame for both for not agreeing on a definition and measurement of the word minimum.

I mean is a ten loser, really an "adjusted" 11 loser hand with no shortage and 6h to the ten a minimum or not?

I don't really care what you agree on but discuss and agree.

[mcphee]

West is a pussy. When you have at least a 50% shot of making game facing ZERO hcp why are we even asking partners opinion? We made this shortage asking bid because we are bidding slam opposite short D? Oh I suppose it's possible, but none of my money goes on that sort of bet.

[phil_20686]

I would have bid game with both hands. West has not shown the fact that he has 3 hearts, which is pretty big opposite 6 cards even if they are little. Its always hard for the weak hand to appropriate value a long weak suit without knowing how many cards in support the strong hand has. East is not minimum for his hand either imo. Would have raised an invite without thinking.

[iandayre]

Something of a system fix. Playing 2C-2D-2NT as 22-24, E has an easy Texas Transfer into game. I assume your range of 2NT was 20-22.

[rmnka447]

I don't understand in this bidding how West ever defines his hand so East can make an intelligible decision.

But that doesn't really matter. So long as East has 6 ♥, with a 3 card fit and 22 HCP -- knowing there's a 9 card fit -- I think you've got to be in game.

If the vulnerability is correct -- E/W vulnerable -- it's even more imperative to bid game. Basic IMP scoring dictates that bidding game vulnerable should be done any time game is 35% or better chance of making. There's just too many combinations of cards where game will make even opposite virtually nothing with the 6 ♥.

So West gets the charge IMO.

[kernsy]

Wrong question. Bidding should go 2 C - 2 D 2 NT. - 3 d transfer , then 3 h - 4 H. ???

[jodepp]

How West can not bid 4♥ with that picture gallery is beyond me. I have sympathy for East's regressive 3♥; beyond opening values, little is known about West's hand. For all East knew, West only wanted to be in 4♥ opposite a specific shortness (say, a stiff spade or diamond).

East can't tell that West is interested in high cards or shortness or both, so East cannot mastermind; he has to do what the system says.

I blame West 80% and the system 20%, as maybe 2♠ on this sequence should ask for shortness. Responder can conveniently show any shortness and imply 'a scrap or two' (like the ♣QJ) with a 3♥ rebid (not 2NT wrongsiding the hand - 2NT can be reserved for the 'dud' hand and opener can sign off in 3♥).

[KurtGodel]

As has been said previously as game is good opposite xxx JTxxxx xx xx you should probably be bidding it, rather than consulting partner. How can you expect East to show a max with no ace or king, no honour in trumps, no singleton. An unsupported J and QJ doubleton is not worth showing to me, how would you feel if after having shown a max your partner puts you in 4♥ with only two card support? Pretty sick I suspect.

[steve2005]

I voted mostly West, with rest blame on their system. West should just bid game, no slam, why ask?
East just answered does he have a shortage.
But East has no idea of West's strength in their methods, so how is he supposed to know QJ♣ is gold. to bid 3N

[msjennifer]

If the explanations of the auction including and upto 2 NT bid are to be believed then since there is nothing more to say east should bid 3NT unless that bid means something else in this weird system.

[PhantomSac]

Both are insane

[steve2005]

iandayre, on 2015-November-15, 12:53, said:

Something of a system fix. Playing 2C-2D-2NT as 22-24, E has an easy Texas Transfer into game. I assume your range of 2NT was 20-22.

If 1C is unlimited sounds like they are using 2N as something artificial. May not be including any balanced hands in 2C even is even using 2C as strong, OP did say unlimited so if correct 1C is including 22--24 and even higher. but who knows.

[jogs]

phil_20686, on 2015-November-15, 12:20, said:

I would have bid game with both hands.

Both deserve more than 50% of the blame. Still 4♥ may fail. Game must be in 4♥. In 3NT the winning hearts may become stranded.