[gwnn]

KJ9xx
xx
KTx
Qxx

p-p-1♥-2♦
p-2♠-3♥-4♦
p-?

favourable mp's

[TylerE]

Pass. I've shown what I have...the trumps are nice, but I have no shortness to make good use of them. I'll consider myself grateful if we chalk up +130.

[dicklont]

Pass.
I can construct a hand that will make 5 but being realistic I just see too many losers.

[hotShot]

Partner does not have 3♠s, so the suit is not easy to develop and the values are probably wasted.

So I'll stay in 4♦.

[Hanoi5]

It depends on partner's style and our bidding agreements. If he has 7 diamonds and a singleton heart we're pretty good for 5, if 2♠ is bid on a diamond fit then he's just competing, if double asks for a stopper then he's pretty unbalanced. I bid 5.

[gwnn]

Hanoi5, on Mar 13 2009, 03:25 PM, said:

It depends on partner's style and our bidding agreements. If he has 7 diamonds and a singleton heart we're pretty good for 5, if 2♠ is bid on a diamond fit then he's just competing, if double asks for a stopper then he's pretty unbalanced. I bid 5.

there's no mention of fit non jumps in the OP so maybe the OP didn't have the agreement with this p.

[Trinidad]

gwnn, on Mar 13 2009, 08:34 AM, said:

Hanoi5, on Mar 13 2009, 03:25 PM, said:

It depends on partner's style and our bidding agreements. If he has 7 diamonds and a singleton heart we're pretty good for 5, if 2♠ is bid on a diamond fit then he's just competing, if double asks for a stopper then he's pretty unbalanced. I bid 5.

there's no mention of fit non jumps in the OP so maybe the OP didn't have the agreement with this p.

Given that OP is a passed hand OP needs to have a long spade suit or some degree of fit for diamonds (otherwise he shouldn't bid at the two level). Making the reasonable assumption that OP would have had a bid to show a weak two in spades it is reasonable that 2♠ shows some fit for diamonds.

This is not because OP has an agreement with his partner to play fit showing non jumps. This is because it doesn't make sense to bid 2♠ on limited values without a fairly secure place to play. If OP plays weak two's (or Multi), this "fairly secure place" must be diamonds. (Without weak twos, it could be spades.)

Or to put it in a different way: One cannot bid 2♠ on a so so hand and a misfit. Since OP passed originally, he cannot have better than a so so hand. Since he bid 2♠ anyway, he cannot have a misfit. Therefore 2♠ shows at least diamond tolerance. (I agree that "fit" is claiming too much, but 2♠ does imply diamond tolerance.)

Given that 2♠ implied some diamonds, I think that I have shown my hand already. Therefore, I pass.

Rik

[gwnn]

KQTxx
Axxx
x
Jxx

your bid?

[Trinidad]

gwnn, on Mar 13 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

KQTxx
Axxx
x
Jxx

your bid?

Pass (I would have opened this hand 1♠ in second seat, but I get your point.)

Where are you going if partner doesn't have spade support (e.g. x Jxx AKQxx Axxx)? And if partner would have spade support, wouldn't he have doubled on a large portion of those hands (rather than bid 2♦)? Note that I wrote: "a large portion", not "all".

When you bid 2♠, you can expect partner to bid 3♦ (or 3♣). Wouldn't you then rather be in 2♦? It's just not worth chasing the possible 3 card support in partner's hand. The risk is too big, the reward too small.

Rik

[jdonn]

Trinidad, on Mar 13 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

gwnn, on Mar 13 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

KQTxx
Axxx
x
Jxx

your bid?

Pass (I would have opened this hand 1♠ in second seat, but I get your point.)

Where are you going if partner doesn't have spade support (e.g. x Jxx AKQxx Axxx)? And if partner would have spade support, wouldn't he have doubled on a large portion of those hands (rather than bid 2♦)? Note that I wrote: "a large portion", not "all".

When you bid 2♠, you can expect partner to bid 3♦ (or 3♣). Wouldn't you then rather be in 2♦? It's just not worth chasing the possible 3 card support in partner's hand. The risk is too big, the reward too small.

Rik

I totally disagree. Partner is not unlikely to have three (or four) card spade support. But also if he has a doubleton spade you may have improved your contract, and if he has a maximum you might just be able to make 3NT or 4♥ or something. Or maybe your LHO is going to rebid his suit no matter what, and then you are very glad you got your suit in so partner knows what to lead. Lots of good can come from bidding, none of which is possible if you make the bid promise diamond tolerance.

[hanp]

Agree with those who claim that 2S shows spades and doesn't promise diamond support, unless you have agreed to (which seems a bad agreement at the 2-level).

To get back to the original question, we have unusually good support for partner but we also have a very soft hand. I pass and hope partner is allowed to play it in 4D.

[whereagles]

I'd like to bring something new to the discussion, but I cant Pass as well.

[Trinidad]

jdonn, on Mar 13 2009, 01:34 PM, said:

Trinidad, on Mar 13 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

gwnn, on Mar 13 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

KQTxx
Axxx
x
Jxx

your bid?

Pass (I would have opened this hand 1♠ in second seat, but I get your point.)

Where are you going if partner doesn't have spade support (e.g. x Jxx AKQxx Axxx)? And if partner would have spade support, wouldn't he have doubled on a large portion of those hands (rather than bid 2♦)? Note that I wrote: "a large portion", not "all".

When you bid 2♠, you can expect partner to bid 3♦ (or 3♣). Wouldn't you then rather be in 2♦? It's just not worth chasing the possible 3 card support in partner's hand. The risk is too big, the reward too small.

Rik

I totally disagree. Partner is not unlikely to have three (or four) card spade support. But also if he has a doubleton spade you may have improved your contract, and if he has a maximum you might just be able to make 3NT or 4♥ or something.

Given that LHO opened 1♥, I do find it highly unlikely that we will make 4♥. 3NT is more likely, but still very far away and the "or something" would then have to be 5♣. (I assume you are talking about game contracts.) That is also very far away.

The thing that you can realistically hope for is that partner has spade support. That is not far away. It is entirely possible. But is it likely enough that you want to force partner to 3♦ on a misfit? I would say no. Maybe a simulation says "yes".

When it comes to lead directing, the same reasoning applies. If partner is on lead then you may want a spade lead. But do you want it so badly that you are willing to pay the price of forcing partner to 3♦, if the opponents pass?

Rik