[mikegill]

Scoring: MP

P 1H 1N P
?

---

Your choices are:

Bid 2C, forcing 2D, then bid 3C, invitational with 6, tending to be fewer HCP than a quantitative invite
Bid 3N
Bid 2N (xfer to clubs) and pass 3C
Bid 2N and then bid 3N, showing a 2245 slam try (obviously not a slam try here since you're a PH)
Bid 2N then 4D, which shows this shape exactly and a GF
Bid 2S, asking partner if he's max or min, and play 2N/3N accordingly

partner's 1NT overcall could be on a good 14-count at these colors.

[Winstonm]

I don't think this hand is as good as it looks - one entry will surely be knocked out on opening lead, meaning partner needs to have huge club fit.

I don't want to play 3C opposite Qx as support, and I don't want to invite in such a bad club suit so that partner overvaluates Kx support.

I think because a plus score should be OK at MPs, I will take an option not presented and simply pass 1N - 7 tricks should be easier to come by than 9 of anything.

[whereagles]

3NT. We probably have 2 heart stoppers and our lack of tenaces suggests finesses through opener, which are likely to suceed.

[pbleighton]

Pass. 3NT is close.

Peter

[pclayton]

Looks like Keri over 1N overcalls? Interesting .

I'll invite with this via 2♣ / 3♣. If pard has prime club cards, 3N could be excellent.

[temp3600]

I would go with the first choice, 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♣. It tells partner his club holding is the key to 3NT, which is exactly what I want to convey.

[brianshark]

My gut says to ask partner to play in 3♣.

[keylime]

I'd go through the invite sequence myself, 2c-2d-3c. Pard needs good clubs to bring 3NT home.

[han]

I don't understand why Winston and Justin think 1NT/2NT might play better than 3C. I'd bid 2C-3C.

[mcphee]

I am going to play 3C via the invitational route or 3N and need C help. At least 3 card help as AQor AK alone is no good with H lead. Come on pard!!

[whereagles]

Why is everybody making a club invite with that anemic suit? This sort of invite is supposed to be based on a semisolid suit (e.g. KQxxxx or AJTxxx) and little else, not on any length + hcp.

[mikegill]

Yes, the 3C invite tends to be on a hand like that. Opener will bid 3NT freely on a hand like Axxx Axx Axx Kxx or something similar (obviously he can't have that here). In fact, that may be one of the problems with this bid - because partner is missing two aces, he will be unwilling to bid 3NT even with a good club fit, since he's worried he doesn't have enough immediate tricks. Give him KQT Kxx Kxxx KQJ, and he's gonna be worried that even if he has 6 clubs and 1 heart, he doesn't have time to get enough diamonds or spades before they get the hearts going.

[Halo]

3NT

If partner's got 14 points, then maybe we are already in trouble versus 1H passed out, -100/-200.

I don't like the idea of telling partner I have a club invite with poor points on this hand.

My second choice would be play in 3C, where I may do better than NT part scores.

[Apollo81]

Partner should not be overcalling 1NT after a major opening with 14 pts. Im making the normal bid which is to game force and if this is too high then it's pard's fault.

Given the options, either 3NT or 2NT....3NT seems fine. It does feel like NT but the second sequence might be better.

Passing 1NT? inviting in clubs? LOL

[awm]

I'll go with 2♠ (asking max or min). This hand is not a particularly good 8 hcp, despite the aces. It's relatively easy to attack the entries (in fact opponents will likely kill one of them on the opening lead) and there are a lot of issues if partner doesn't have a good club fit. I don't generally hold with the school of "every 23 hcp combined is worth a 3NT bid" and consider that this hand is substantially worse than something like:

xx
x
Axxx
KJTxxx

which is a reasonable game force.

While 3♣ might be a better partial than 2NT, I don't particularly want partner getting all excited with ♣Kx and fairly minimum values thinking that "the clubs will run."

[ohioply]

pass-hand feels like crap to me. Clubs are not very good and with one of my entrys likely gone on first trick partner will probably not be able to establish them. Eight hcp does not an invite make for me. we're only in the 23-25hcp range I'd like at least J109xxx clubs before I invite.

[mikeh]

Every choice, including pass, is flawed, which is why this is a problem

Pass: wrong if we can make 130/120 or can make game. Correct if we can make 120/110 or 90

Invite showing ♣s: correct if partner has the 'right' ♣ holding: Kxx or Axx might be enough and AQx is almost surely enough. Correct also if we play 3♣ making 130/120. Wrong if partner misevaluates for ♣s, either by overbidding (thinking Ax or Kx is enough as it will be opposite a 'book' invitational sequence) or if we end up in 3♣ either down or 110 opposite 120.

Force to game: correct if the invite would get partner passing when game makes: see Justin's example with KQxxx in♦ with Jx in ♣s. Break even with invite when partner accepts... whether or not 3N makes. Loses when game fails...loses immediately to pass and loses to the invite route when partner would successfully pass 3♣.

I am not going to invite: it is wrong too often: we may miss a cold 3N while failing in 3♣ on a 4-1 trump break opposite xx. Partner will often mis-evaluate, so the invite lacks the usual upside of involving partner. I am a strong advocate of inviting partner to the dance when I don't know what to do... but I have no way of describing this hand.... in particular, no way of telling him that I need REAL help in ♣s. Add to that the prospect of going down in 3♣ with 9 winners in notrump, and the middle-of-the-road bid is merely positioning myself (poorly) for the post-mortem.

I pass at mps and imps nv and bid 3N, with confidence, red at imps.

None of the other posted options carry any attraction for me at all.

[Halo]

This is MPs.

You are passing.

Could work - don't understand the doomy 'nothing else appeals'.