[mtvesuvius]

I chose 3♣ and partner bid 3NT, so it is really a moot point, but I thought that this was in interesting problem that rarely comes up... My case for 3♣ was that if partner had a GF it didn't matter, but NT would play better from his side. If partner had a weaker hand with equal length in the minors partner would correct to 3♦, if partner has longer ♣ then ♦ then we usually want to play ♣ or ♥, and if partner has longer ♦ than ♣ then we want to play ♦. The trouble is when partner is 4=4=2=3 or 3=5=2=3 or other similar hands where we have a 4-3 or 5-3 ♥ fit and play 3♣ in our 3-3 fit. The disadvantage to 3♥ is when partner has 4♦ or 5♣, but 3♥ is reasonable imo. What will partner do over 2NT though? This is the problem that I have because with a 2=4=3=4 without a ♠ stopper, partner will pass. If my logic is wrong somewhere please let me know.

[orlam]

Are you guys saying that a 15-17 NT without 4 heart and without stopper is good enough to force to game on this auction? In my experience this is rather the sort of hand where we have 23-24 hcp and even 26 hcp wouldn't be enough for game.

[fromageGB]

I can't believe the votes for 2NT. Given that partner made a takeout double he won't have many spades, so give him a good one and they make 5 spade tricks in NT. That means we have 7 solid tricks elsewhere off the top with no long suit trick ??? No way.

If 2NT was intended as a sacrifice, then I prefer a sacrifice in clubs.
If 2NT or 3C has even a glimmer of making, then 2S is going off miles.
Pass seems so obvious to me. What am I missing?

[Fluffy]

pass obvious?, opponents have 8-10 trumps and are palying at the 2 level, you might go to jail for playing against the law

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

2NT assuming this is some sort of scrambling,
not 100% sure about this one.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[marcD]

2NT Natural not scrambling. Think priority is to describe hand type. Hope partner does not pass but even if he does it does not have to be worse than player 3♦ in a 4-2 fit if i invent 3♣ or 4♥ if partner raises my 3♥ call .

[fromageGB]

Fluffy, on Feb 20 2009, 11:08 AM, said:

pass obvious?, opponents have 8-10 trumps and are palying at the 2 level, you might go to jail for playing against the law

I think bidding is against the law. Give them 9 trumps, and the total number of tricks is 17. We have at least a 23 count, many commentators reckon more. OK, I concede they may make the contract, but I would say the odds are against it. I would also say the odds are against us making a contract unless partner is stronger, but of course if he is stronger then the double is better than a part score, and if game is available, double is better than our game.

Yes, I don't like doubling opponents into game in IMPS, but this is a time I would be happy(well, not ecstatic) to do so.

OK Vesuvius, time to own up and tell us what partner had for his double.

[mtvesuvius]

fromageGB, on Feb 20 2009, 06:50 AM, said:

OK Vesuvius, time to own up and tell us what partner had for his double.

OK, I guess I gotta come out with it

Partner held K65 KQJ4 983 AKT. 2♠ is down one instead of the easy 3NT.

Redit: The Full Deal: http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer...egative)P3C{The Bid in Question; 2S is only -1}P3NPPP&p=

This post has been edited by mtvesuvius: 2009-February-20, 08:11

[jdonn]

fromageGB, on Feb 20 2009, 06:50 AM, said:

Fluffy, on Feb 20 2009, 11:08 AM, said:

pass obvious?, opponents have 8-10 trumps and are palying at the 2 level, you might go to jail for playing against the law

I think bidding is against the law. Give them 9 trumps, and the total number of tricks is 17. We have at least a 23 count, many commentators reckon more. OK, I concede they may make the contract, but I would say the odds are against it. I would also say the odds are against us making a contract unless partner is stronger, but of course if he is stronger then the double is better than a part score, and if game is available, double is better than our game.

Yes, I don't like doubling opponents into game in IMPS, but this is a time I would be happy(well, not ecstatic) to do so.

I don't understand a law argument. We know almost nothing about the trump length of either side. Sometimes the partner of the 2♠ bidder doesn't raise with 3. Partner could negative double with 4 or 0 spades. He could have 6 card support for diamonds or a void in diamonds. I mean there are crapshoots and then there are crapshoots...

[whereagles]

I play 2NT as lebenshol here, so I can bid that and pass pard's suit, hoping it's a 5 carder.

On a good day I'll just pass

[mtvesuvius]

whereagles, on Feb 20 2009, 10:58 AM, said:

I play 2NT as lebenshol here

*Ahem* Lehbensohl by opener?

[jdonn]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 20 2009, 12:13 PM, said:

whereagles, on Feb 20 2009, 10:58 AM, said:

I play 2NT as lebenshol here

*Ahem* Lehbensohl by opener?

Just pretend he said good/bad. Same effect.

[fromageGB]

mtvesuvius, on Feb 20 2009, 02:51 PM, said:

Partner held K65 KQJ4 983 AKT. 2♠ is down one instead of the easy 3NT.

Thank you for the hand. Yes, an easy 3NT but I cannot see spades making more than 6 tricks. Only -500. I lose on this one.

Jdonn - I'm glad I don't play with your partners :-)

[mikestar]

jdonn, on Feb 20 2009, 02:35 AM, said:

rogerclee, on Feb 19 2009, 09:27 PM, said:

TylerE, on Feb 19 2009, 11:32 AM, said:

This hand is one of the main things I like about playing weak/mini NT...this problem doesn't exist. On the given hand..probably 2NT.

I think it is strange that you think that "awkward hands outside my NT range" is a reason to play weak NT, since there are many (!!!) more hands where you will have this problem with a weak NT. It is because "minimum balanced" and "minimum unbalanced" are much more similar than "minimum unbalanced" and "strong NT", so you have less to sort out if you play a strong NT.

I think the implication was there are no awkward strong notrump hands here since if they don't have a stopper they are good enough to cuebid.

Totally correct and it bears mentioning that weak NT hands are far more frequent than strong NT hands, so weak NT is likely to be a winner even if the problems for a 15-17 hand are equally difficult in competition after opening a suit.