[ArtK78]

My argument in favor of bidding 5♣ earlier focused on the possibility that the spade suit could be run against us. But my main point is that 5♣ rated to be at least as good as 3NT and potentially better. There might be a flaw in one of the outside suits, not necessarily spades. Perhaps partner has good spades and is weak in one of the red suits and missing the ♣K.

I have a singleton diamond. Last time I checked, partner's 3NT bid did not promise a solid diamond stopper. His diamonds suit could be Jxxx or worse. A possible hand:

AKx
KQxx
Jxxx
xx

In any event, it seems to me that 5♣ should be the right contract.

[jkdood]

There are of course countless hands that will support the outcome success (or failure) of either 5C or 3N.

I chose 3N because on frequency I think it not only more likely that scattered values in the non-C suits will ensure 3N, there's the known difficulty in defending 3N... starting with choice of opening lead, which could be low from an Ace that would not occur in a suit defense, or just not optimal for the defense.

I know my example hand is no better than yours, but just for the heck of it, imagine:

Axx JTxx QJxx xx or Axxx JTxx Q9xx x or similar.

If the club K is offside, 5C has no chance against any opp with an awake brain.

Yet 3N could very well see a spade lead, perhaps FROM the offside K, and be cold at this juncture.

For more details, talk to Hamman:-)

[jtfanclub]

ArtK78, on Jul 29 2008, 04:47 PM, said:

But my main point is that 5♣ rated to be at least as good as 3NT and potentially better.

I guess in my case, I was just focusing on spades. I don't have a strong opinion about 3NT vs. 5♣ in IMPs.

I just have a strong opinion about 4♣.

[han]

Strongly agree with the point jdonn is making in this thread.