[AthosINT]

Hello Everyone,

I had this hand some days ago :

98xxx
-
KQJ10xx
xx

We were playing imp pairs. I was dealer, love all.
I passed, LHO passed, partner opened 2NT, and RHO passed. What would you bid now (your p is a casual partner, you have no special agreement) ?

[Al_U_Card]

Seems to me that transfer to S and then bid 3NT has a number of ways to win.....getting to the Diamond slam when it is there requires quite the parley.

[mcphee]

I make a xfer to S and bid D. To my simple brain I want to show S and D. If partner bids 4S I give up and hope I was right.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3H, over 3S bid 3NT

Keep it simple.

Marlowe

[AthosINT]

Let me understand. Is 3NT non forcing for you ? Because in France it IS non forcing

[mike777]

I would bid 3c and over 3h rebid 4d forcing but could understand other approaches.

4h would be kickback(ace ask for d) over 4d, 4s would be 4 card spade suit not a cuebid and 4nt would be to play. I would not show heart void. Do not have much interest with playing in 5-3 spade fit and ruffing hearts in my hand so I do not transfer at imps.

[P_Marlowe]

AthosINT, on Jan 10 2006, 05:42 PM, said:

Let me understand. Is 3NT non forcing for you ? Because in France it IS non forcing

Yes, of course.

I would expect Partner to break the
transfer with 3 card support and prime
values, i.e. AK combinations.

In effect 3 NT gives up on diamond.

Marlowe

[kenrexford]

6D. This is IMP pairs. I could care less if we have a spade fit. This is a "casual" partnership, with no tools. So, I bid what I probably can make for a decent score.

[temp3600]

Transfer to spades, then 3NT. Unless partner's spades are great, I want to stop low.

[FrancesHinden]

As we have no special agreements, I would bid 4D showing a natural slam try in the suit.

[joker_gib]

P_Marlowe, on Jan 10 2006, 11:21 PM, said:

Hi,

3H, over 3S bid 3NT

Keep it simple.

Marlowe

Same with no special agreement and pick up partner.

[MickyB]

Not introducing diamonds on this hand is insane. Showing it as 5♠4+♦ is almost as bad. 4♦ slam-try if pard seems to know what he is doing, 6♦ if not.

[Al_U_Card]

Looks like it comes down to the value of the hand opposite a 2NT opener in various contracts.

3NT : if pard has the D ace you're likely making (but no guarantee of losing the first 5 H tricks)

4S : you have 6 losers and a source of tricks. 4S is a lock unless pard has 2 baby Spades in which case you would be glad to have bid game thru 3NT first.

5D : a decent contract, but still 11 tricks needed and all you have to offer is 6 (5) trump tricks. A 2NT hand is usually worth 4 sure tricks (gee 5+4=9 =3NT)

6D : needs a great fit and all the right cards and a good lead........

[FrancesHinden]

Al_U_Card, on Jan 11 2006, 03:48 PM, said:

6D : needs a great fit and all the right cards and a good lead........

6D doesn't need anything like that much. The main thing 6D needs is not too much wasted in hearts.

[Fluffy]

kenrexford, on Jan 10 2006, 11:07 PM, said:

6D. This is IMP pairs. I could care less if we have a spade fit. This is a "casual" partnership, with no tools. So, I bid what I probably can make for a decent score.

I am with you, I would try to go slower thoug, bidding 3♠ then 4♦, then 5♦ and see if partner takes the point.

[FrancesHinden]

Quote

Looks like it comes down to the value of the hand opposite a 2NT opener in various contracts.

This comment got me thinking further. I did a simulation - giving partner 20-22 HCP, at least 2 cards in every suit and no more than 5 in a major or 6 in a minor, and not 54 in the majors (which is my definition of a 2NT opener). I started looking at the results to decide where I wanted to be. Then I stopped looking at the results and starting thinking.


i) I find it hard (no, virtually impossible) to construct any hand where we are making more tricks in spades than in diamonds. Any spade or club losers we have we are (almost) certain to have in both contracts, but we might be able to get rid of all of our spades on dummy's high cards. So it's only right to play in spades if both contracts are making exactly 10 tricks.

ii) We only have a 6-count. There is a fair probability that 3NT is not making.

So the real question is how likely is it that 5D is going off and 4S making, and that 6D is making. Together with that question is how partner will interpret... 2NT - 4D - 4H - 4S. As a 2-suiter? Or as a cue for diamonds?

[Al_U_Card]

The conditional nature of the exercise is also situational. Match, opps, what you feel etc. Dummy has playing strength and no room to investigate. (Almost makes you want to switch to a 1♣ opening structure (shudder).

Like I said before, only if opener has two baby spades will you have probs either way. Going with ♦ only is a big position to take and I, for one, think that the xfr to ♠ and 3NT bid has the highest liklihood of producing an acceptable result.

[Al_U_Card]

I don't suppose that 3♣ then 3♠ after the likely 3♥ bid by opener would show 5♠ and enough values for game. If so, when pard takes it to 3NT would 4♦ be a slam try in ♦?

[AthosINT]

Hello,

I posted this hand, and saw only one player agreeing with me.

My reasoning is like this :
with the spades and the diamonds inverted i am sure many would think about 6 Spades. and why would it be easier to score 12 tricks in spades than in diamonds ?

So i am going to look for 6 Diamonds.

But a 9 card spade fit suits me pretty well => i bid 3 Clubs. If i hear 3 Spades i am going toward 6 Spades, if i hear 3 hearts i ll slow down. I m not sure actually. I may bid 5 Diamonds as a sign off.

If i hear 3 Diamonds, that good news with 7 cards in the minor, and the Diamonds played by partner. 4 Diamondswould then be the 'correct' answer (to me) but i bid 6!d to avoid giving too much information. I agree this could be wrong though, and prefer 4!d in theory...