[mike777]

Scoring: IMP

1D=2C=P=2H
P=?

---

[pclayton]

This is a bear of a problem. Conditions aren't stated, but I assume 2♥ is constructive, but not forcing.

I'm going to try 3♦. If I hear 3♥, I'll bid 4♥. If I hear 3♠, I'll try 3N. And if I hear 4♣, I'll try 4♦.

I see two huge flaws with 3N. The first is that they sometimes lead a spade and it will be floating through pard's stopper or non-stopper. The 2nd is that we probably have a better spot in hearts, even on a 5-2. And its not matchpoints, so why do I want to take the plunge when I don't have to right now.

Its too bad we can't set up a forcing sequence with 2N, which really should be forcing. If there was federal legislation that said that 2N is NEVER to play, I'd support it

[Al_U_Card]

Isn't it likely that opener has 4S cards? A real tuff call as I want pard to bid 3NT so I am tempted to bid 2S and see if I can get him to bid 2NT.......if he rebids H I'll try 4.

[luke warm]

the problem with 2s is, partner might raise to 4 ... it's a gamble, but you're vulnerable and expect a diamond lead... 3nt looks good at imps, tho you could get ripped

[Kalvan14]

2♠ should be ambiguous, not necessarily a real suit, but certainly values.
I vote for 3♦, forcing and more representative of my hand.
Actually, on this particular sequence, it should indicate real values in ♦

[mike777]

I liked 4H but I see I am out on that cold limb all alone.

[Fluffy]

Partner rates to have xx in clubs, we rate to make then 5♣+2♦... we need partner with 2 quick tricks in 3NT. Wich is kinda hard but possible. I think I'll only bid 3♣ this time (but note my 2♣ was already very sound, not that sound though)