[gnasher]

hotShot, on May 15 2008, 01:20 PM, said:

And before you ask with xxx AQ10x x KQJxx I would have bid over 1♠.

I wasn't going to ask that. Since you've just said you'd defend two spades on a hand where I'd be worried about missing game, there's unlikely to be any meeting of minds.

[hotShot]

Well at least I can agree that the set of hands that make game is not empty and some are also a subset of partners possible hands.
xx KJxx xxxx AQJ will do and even xx Kxxx Qxxx AQx has good chances.
I just think that the subset is (very) small compared to the subset of possible hands partner could have.

I need a more convenient simulation tool .....

[pclayton]

I was Matt's partner. I held a 1=4=4=4 10 count (or so) and had an automatic 3♥ preference. At the time, I thought that 2N would be natural. The hand I cited was something like AQx Qxxx xxxx Qx.

2N as 4 hearts - 4 unknown minor seems reasonable, but its one of those bids looks best in the post-mortem.

I think 3 of a minor is self-evident. Double is cooperative - I haven't had a penalty double here - ever.

[jdonn]

pclayton, on May 15 2008, 11:12 AM, said:

2N as 4 hearts - 4 unknown minor seems reasonable, but its one of those bids looks best in the post-mortem.

Oddly enough I think oppositely. 2NT as natural is quite possibly more reasonable, but it's by my default agreements that undefined 2NT in a competitive auction is looking for the best fit whenever that interpretation is possible.

[Echognome]

If it matters, I was just wondering what to bid with:

♠ 652
♥ AK72
♦ T9
♣ A752

It seemed wrong to sell out to 2♠, but thought 3♣ sounded like 4-5. Double seemed out. So it was guess to bid 2NT, 3♣ or 3♥. I guessed 2NT and luckily it worked out.

Thanks everyone for their input.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on May 15 2008, 06:16 AM, said:

Double = optional/values, something like 3433 7-8 count.
2NT = by default for me, choice of suits. Thus 4 hearts and 4 of a minor. Thus I am forced to admit I play baron
3m = 5+ with 4 hearts. Oddly enough this one is the most obvious regardless of how you interpret double and 2NT.
3♥ = something we can all agree on.

Completely agree.

[cherdano]

I have changed my mind on this. If we are bidding 2♥ opposite a passed hand, then we are giving up on game. So why should we be bidding 2♥ rather than 2m with a longer minor?

I agree that double is optional but of course it should show more than 7-8 hcp opposite a passed hand. With 5 hearts we would just always bid 3♥, so 3m is probably 4-4, and I have no idea anymore what 2N is. Maybe 1444?

[Echognome]

cherdano, on May 15 2008, 12:25 PM, said:

I have changed my mind on this. If we are bidding 2♥ opposite a passed hand, then we are giving up on game. So why should we be bidding 2♥ rather than 2m with a longer minor?

Because it's more likely partner has 4 hearts than 4 of our minor? Partner might also have an awkward 2452 hand and wants to keep the bidding alive. Of course, he could also hold a 13(45) hand too.

[kenrexford]

cherdano, on May 15 2008, 03:25 PM, said:

I have changed my mind on this. If we are bidding 2♥ opposite a passed hand, then we are giving up on game. So why should we be bidding 2♥ rather than 2m with a longer minor?

I agree that double is optional but of course it should show more than 7-8 hcp opposite a passed hand. With 5 hearts we would just always bid 3♥, so 3m is probably 4-4, and I have no idea anymore what 2N is. Maybe 1444?

Matchpoints is one (sick) reason.

The other is planning. If you don't expect to play at the two-level, bid your hands out in a way that facilitates a late auction. The easiest way is to bid the higher suit first and then later clarify whether you are longer or equal in the second suit. If you bid the minor first, 2NT handles both minor nuances.

[mikeh]

cherdano, on May 15 2008, 03:25 PM, said:

I have changed my mind on this. If we are bidding 2♥ opposite a passed hand, then we are giving up on game. So why should we be bidding 2♥ rather than 2m with a longer minor?

I agree that double is optional but of course it should show more than 7-8 hcp opposite a passed hand. With 5 hearts we would just always bid 3♥, so 3m is probably 4-4, and I have no idea anymore what 2N is. Maybe 1444?

I share the concern about the utility of a natural 2N bid, but I see zero percentage in any treatment that shows 1=4=4=4 as a possibility. Partner, a passed hand, reopened with a double... how many spades do we think he has? Then look at the opps... opener passed the double and responder passed initially. Partner should hold fewer than 3 spades, so the opps have 10-12 spades between them when we are 1=4=4=4. Not only is this impossible against most opps, but they are going to outbid us anyway.

[kenrexford]

Two problems with the utility of a 2NT as natural meaning:

1. Why not 1NT the first round?
2. Why not double now?

What kind of a hand justifies bidding 2NT after a spade fit is discovered, rather than doubling 2♠ and rather than bidding 1NT (or even 2NT) on the first round? If it exists, I'd have to imagine that it is a much less frequent holding than simply 4-4 in hearts and a minor, where you want to avoid playing a 4-3 heart fit when a 4-5 minor fit might exist.

BTW -- this also solves that (bizarre) 1-4-4-4 problem.