[Echognome]

Scoring: MP

(2♥) - 2NT - (P) - ?

---

You are playing on Day 1 of the Blue Ribbon Pairs. You play fairly standard methods over 2NT. So what's it going to be?

[CSGibson]

I don't play your methods, so I'll just go with what I'd do with a similar hand using my own. I'm bidding 3 spades as minor suit stayman, followed by 5 diamonds if partner bids 3NT.

[mike777]

Echognome, on Dec 3 2007, 02:20 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

(2♥) - 2NT - (P) - ?

---

You are playing on Day 1 of the Blue Ribbon Pairs. You play fairly standard methods over 2NT. So what's it going to be?

6d

game try.

[hrothgar]

This is a bitchy one:

If it were IMPs, I think that I'd use whatever methods I have to show a minor based hand over a 2NT opening.

Playing Matchpoints NT is looking a lot more attractive.

The one thing that I don't do is bid 6D. Partner has (at most) an 18 count. Yes, I have wonderful shape, but I don't think that we have enough assets for me to commit to slam (especially since Diamonds might not behave).

Mark me down for 3N, however, I am far from sure that this is correct.

[benlessard]

3S followed by 4D natural keycard (1430). If partner show 1 keycard with 4H ill bid 4S asking for Q of D and pass the 4nt responses. If partner respond 3 key ill play 6D. if hes got 2 he will respond 4Nt and ill pass.

Wouldnt suprise me if 3Nt goes down.

[mcphee]

I fail to see why we are so slam anxious. Seems to me that although slam might come in you are bucking the odds. Most days partner is going to hold 3H. You could easily be off 2 fast tricks. Looks to me as though we are grabbing for 6 level bids we are being pushy, at pairs this is not the board I would want to shoot with. I'd pass 3N and hope we make it, that seems like a place we can garner a few match points.

[Apollo81]

I'd at least try for slam in diamonds. I think slam (or 5♦ being better than 3NT) is likely enough to justify bypassing 3NT.

[mikeh]

Once again, we have posters telling us how they'd bid the hand using their pet methods, despite the fact that the problem specifies the methods. The point of the post is NOT whether your pet methods work best, but, given the methods in use (which are not esoteric), how do you value this hand in matchpoints in a tough field.. a field tougher than many forum members have ever played.

It is easy to envisage hands on which partner has no play for slam, and hands where grand is laydown. On the former, we want to be in 3N, and on the latter we (realistically) hope to reach a small slam. Incidentally, there are hands on which 3N fails (picture Ax AKxx Axx Jxxx on a spade lead and the ♦K doesn't drop, or Qxx AQxx AKx QJxx with split spade honours).

This very minor risk helps push me to the diamond slam try sequence. BTW, I assume that we can stop in 4N after this start?

(2♥)  2N  (P)  3♠
(P)   3N  (P)  4♦
(P)   4N

should be a soft hand, with no interest... I assume... and now I would pass. While 3N may fail on a bad day, when it makes it is almost always making 10 or 11 tricks so the risk of forcing to 4N, in hopes of a slam, seem acceptable.

[Echognome]

In answer to Mike's question, 4NT by partner would have been regressive. As we happen to play it, 4♥ would be kickback.

I was also concerned that I took a long time (for me) to decide whether to bid 3NT or make a try. This was a bit of a shame as it would look like I had a flawed or very mild slam try in a minor. But then I had the confidence that partner would not take advantage of the UI.

[Edmunte1]

I think that 5♦ is a much better contract than 3NT. Between a direct 5♦ and a slam invite i prefer the latter as long as can make a mild slam try

[han]

I would also bid 3S followed by 4D in these methods, seems clearly right.

Echognome, on Dec 3 2007, 12:50 PM, said:

I was also concerned that I took a long time (for me) to decide whether to bid 3NT or make a try.  This was a bit of a shame as it would look like I had a flawed or very mild slam try in a minor.  But then I had the confidence that partner would not take advantage of the UI.

I wouldn't worry about the tempo at all. There could be so many different reasons why you were tanking.

[whereagles]

this is MPs, huh? well... 3NT it is

[CSGibson]

Quote

Once again, we have posters telling us how they'd bid the hand using their pet methods, despite the fact that the problem specifies the methods. The point of the post is NOT whether your pet methods work best, but, given the methods in use (which are not esoteric), how do you value this hand in matchpoints in a tough field.. a field tougher than many forum members have ever played.

You're right, sorry, I was thinking that the other - explain voting option was an invitation to discuss methods, but on second look it is an invitation to play around with theirs.

Without full knowledge of what agreements they have to explore minor suit games, I'm a 5 diamond bidder. partner in this sequence is not looking for a spade game, so I'm assuming he has 3 spades or maybe a less-than-solid 4. Either way, partner's probably getting a surprise spade lead, or a switch when they see dummy, and I don't have help, making 3NT risky. My two short suits scream suit contract, and I'm going 5 diamonds, especially since partner is likely to have wasted values in hearts.

[FrancesHinden]

Echognome, on Dec 3 2007, 06:50 PM, said:

I was also concerned that I took a long time (for me) to decide whether to bid 3NT or make a try. This was a bit of a shame as it would look like I had a flawed or very mild slam try in a minor. But then I had the confidence that partner would not take advantage of the UI.

I don't think the tempo matters. If you bid 3NT slowly, that just gives the opponents AI, partner merely has to play the hand.

If you make a slow slam try in diamonds that doesn't really give partner any useful UI i.e. it doesn't demonstrably suggest he take any particular action, because you could have been thinking about all sorts of things (whether to show the diamonds at all, whether to jump to slam, whether to look for a major suit fit first etc etc)

[CSGibson]

Just a thought, is 4 clubs (shield your eyes and hide the children)...Gerber on this auction? If so, it can solve a lot of problems with letting you know if partner has soft or hard values. 3 aces, go to slam, 2 aces, go to game, 1 ace, maybe try 4 NT. I know, silly thought since no self-respecting expert actually plays Gerber, right?