[Mr. Dodgy]

Scoring: XIMP

opps silent

1♦-1♥-1♠-?

---

[rogerclee]

2♦. This rates to be a better contract than 1NT, given that I have Kx in the unbid suit and good trump support for partner's 4+ card suit.

[skjaeran]

2♦ (or rather 2♣ puppet to 2♦ and pass). At IMPs (or XIMPs) this is rather obvious. We rate to take at least a trick more playing in our fit, and opps might have a running heart suit and a few tricks here and there in NT.

[P_Marlowe]

1 NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[TimG]

rogerclee, on Sep 25 2008, 01:28 AM, said:

2♦. This rates to be a better contract than 1NT, given that I have Kx in the unbid suit and good trump support for partner's 4+ card suit.

Isn't Kx in an unbid suit a reason to bid 1NT (and protect the holding by becoming declarer)?

[FrancesHinden]

1NT is horrible. Yes, we have a club stop but other than that all our high cards are in partner's suit. I would only bid 1NT if partner could be 4=3=3=3 and has opened better minor; even opposite a possible 4243/4342 2D rates to be a better spot. And if partner has promised an unbalanced hand 2D is even more obvious.

3D is not unreasonable, but 2D is normal.

[Edmunte1]

2♦, playing in our 4-4+ fit, with obvious potential for ruffing, adding the chance that hearts could be unstopped

[jdonn]

1NT is a beginner bid.

[TimG]

TimG, on Sep 25 2008, 07:31 AM, said:

rogerclee, on Sep 25 2008, 01:28 AM, said:

2♦. This rates to be a better contract than 1NT, given that I have Kx in the unbid suit and good trump support for partner's 4+ card suit.

Isn't Kx in an unbid suit a reason to bid 1NT (and protect the holding by becoming declarer)?

Though I am often guilty of beginner bids, just to be clear, I was not advocating for a 1NT bid, just pointing out that I thought it strange the ♣Kx was given as a reason not to bid 1NT.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Sep 25 2008, 10:38 AM, said:

TimG, on Sep 25 2008, 07:31 AM, said:

rogerclee, on Sep 25 2008, 01:28 AM, said:

2♦. This rates to be a better contract than 1NT, given that I have Kx in the unbid suit and good trump support for partner's 4+ card suit.

Isn't Kx in an unbid suit a reason to bid 1NT (and protect the holding by becoming declarer)?

Though I am often guilty of beginner bids, just to be clear, I was not advocating for a 1NT bid, just pointing out that I thought it strange the ♣Kx was given as a reason not to bid 1NT.

I wasn't aiming at you or anyone in particular, it is simply how I view the bids.

Kx tends to be a very suit oriented holding, by the way.

[P_Marlowe]

In my opinion there is one reason to bid 1NT,
which was not yet mentioned:

1NT sounds a lot more constructive / positve
than 2D, of course the sound of the 1NT bid
may be different to your ears.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdonn]

P_Marlowe, on Sep 25 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

In my opinion there is one reason to bid 1NT,
which was not yet mentioned:

1NT sounds a lot more constructive / positve
than 2D, of course the sound of the 1NT bid
may be different to your ears.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Do you think this hand is outside the range of 2♦? It looks like it could be in the dictionary next to what 2♦ shows.

[FrancesHinden]

jdonn, on Sep 25 2008, 05:24 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Sep 25 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

In my opinion there is one reason to bid 1NT,
which was not yet mentioned:

1NT sounds a lot more constructive / positve
than 2D, of course the sound of the 1NT bid
may be different to your ears.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Do you think this hand is outside the range of 2♦? It looks like it could be in the dictionary next to what 2♦ shows.

I think it's a maximum for 2D. After all, if partner has some (carefully constructed) minimum such as

KQxx
x
Axxxx
Axx

then 5D is a playable contract (not much worse than SA onside or Jx)


I don't think 1NT shows any more high cards than 2D, merely a different hand type.

[P_Marlowe]

jdonn, on Sep 25 2008, 11:24 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Sep 25 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

In my opinion there is one reason to bid 1NT,
which was not yet mentioned:

1NT sounds a lot more constructive / positve
than 2D, of course the sound of the 1NT bid
may be different to your ears.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Do you think this hand is outside the range of 2♦? It looks like it could be in the dictionary next to what 2♦ shows.

No.

But most of the time a 2D response will be based
on more shape.

We have high cards, making 3NT an option.
After 2D partner may not or may not go looking for
game 11 tricks are a lot.

I looked at the comments, which said, we play IMPs
lets settle for the safest part score, ..., well I dont
envision going down, I think game is still a likely
scenario.
But as I said, it may well be, that I am alone in hearing
the difference in 1NT and 2D.
sound bet

With kind regards
Marlowe

[skjaeran]

P_Marlowe, on Sep 26 2008, 12:10 AM, said:

jdonn, on Sep 25 2008, 11:24 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Sep 25 2008, 10:46 AM, said:

In my opinion there is one reason to bid 1NT,
which was not yet mentioned:

1NT sounds a lot more constructive / positve
than 2D, of course the sound of the 1NT bid
may be different to your ears.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Do you think this hand is outside the range of 2♦? It looks like it could be in the dictionary next to what 2♦ shows.

No.

But most of the time a 2D response will be based
on more shape.

We have high cards, making 3NT an option.
After 2D partner may not or may not go looking for
game 11 tricks are a lot.

I looked at the comments, which said, we play IMPs
lets settle for the safest part score, ..., well I dont
envision going down, I think game is still a likely
scenario.
But as I said, it may well be, that I am alone in hearing
the difference in 1NT and 2D.
sound bet

With kind regards
Marlowe

3NT is still in the picture after 2♦. 1NT and 2♦ shows the same range.

If partner rebids 2NT we've got an easy raise. Besides, we've most probably rightsided it too.