[kgr]

Scoring: MP

---

Partner opens 2NT, 20-21.
3NT, 3C/4D (D slam invite), or 6D?

[jillybean]

Invite 6♦

[nigel_k]

This is pretty close. The best contract is probably 3NT but if you make a slam try with 4D and partner accepts it should have a decent play.

Since it's matchpoints you'd need to be confident partner can bid 4NT to play if he refuses your invitation. Even at IMPs 3NT will be a safer game than 5D, but maybe not 4NT.

Diamonds will also be more attractive if you have some way of making partner declarer.

Unless the field is strong I would just bid 3NT and hope to gain in the play. In a strong matchpoints field or at IMPs you could go either way.

[Cascade]

jillybean, on Jul 29 2009, 12:29 PM, said:

Invite 6♦

Me too.

[aguahombre]

nigel_k, on Jul 28 2009, 07:46 PM, said:

Diamonds will also be more attractive if you have some way of making partner declarer.

Puppet could do that, or uncover a 5-3 spade fit.

[the hog]

I think the chances of making 6D are not as good as 4NT going off due to a poor D break. A lot of this depends on partner's H holding of course. I lack the methods to find out this information over a 2NT opening, and that is why it is nicknamed a "slam killer". I will just bid 3NT.

[Cascade]

I have looked at a few possible hands and I it doesnt look like we are worth making a slam try.

And it is very hard to determine whether 3NT or 5♦ is best. With a little more distribution I would bid 5♦ here though probably 3NT is better.

[the hog]

Cascade, on Jul 29 2009, 09:04 AM, said:

I have looked at a few possible hands and I it doesnt look like we are worth making a slam try.

And it is very hard to determine whether 3NT or 5♦ is best. With a little more distribution I would bid 5♦ here though probably 3NT is better.

That was actually my worry as well. It is not that hard to construct hands where Ds break 4-? and you have no play for 3NT, but 5D can still make. You may well have no entry to the D hand.

[aguahombre]

AKXXX AXX JX AKQ
AKQXX QXX QX AKX
PUPPET enroute to 3NT, can't hurt. Might find out something.

[kgr]

---

We play Romex:
2NT-3♣
3♦-4♦
3♦=No 4-card ♥, No 5-card ♠
4♦=slam interest with 5-card ♦
 
or:
2NT-4♦
4♦=slam interest with 6-card ♦
 
After both starts North should bid 4NT to give a bad hand for ♦'s and the bidding will end in 4NT?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

openers hand is slightly better, if a 6 card suit is know,
but looking for a 5-3 fit in a major, espesially if you
regular open 2NT with a 5 card major is clear cut.

So facing holding only an average number of KC,
opener should simply sign of in 4NT.

In general I would say, that you should try for slam, if
you can sign of in 4NT, we would not be able.
It is certainly possible, that you go down in 4NT, but I think
the risk is not that big.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Fluffy]

The_Hog, on Jul 29 2009, 02:19 AM, said:

Cascade, on Jul 29 2009, 09:04 AM, said:

I have looked at a few possible hands and I it doesnt look like we are worth making a slam try.

And it is very hard to determine whether 3NT or 5♦ is best.  With a little more distribution I would bid 5♦ here though probably 3NT is better.

That was actually my worry as well. It is not that hard to construct hands where Ds break 4-? and you have no play for 3NT, but 5D can still make. You may well have no entry to the D hand.

This is MPs, thinking about playing 5♦ when 3NT is avaible is pointless IMO.

[FrancesHinden]

kgr, on Jul 29 2009, 09:01 AM, said:

---

We play Romex:
2NT-3♣
3♦-4♦
3♦=No 4-card ♥, No 5-card ♠
4♦=slam interest with 5-card ♦
 
or:
2NT-4♦
4♦=slam interest with 6-card ♦
 
After both starts North should bid 4NT to give a bad hand for ♦'s and the bidding will end in 4NT?

After 2NT - 4D opener has a perfectly good hand for diamonds as his Qx has improved. And given that 4NT is not that much better than 6D, I'd want to be in 6D even though it's only just with the odds (diamonds 3-2 and no club ruff).

[lilboyman]

Since this is matchpoints, I think I will just bid 3NT. To expect partner to cover my 8 losers with a balanced 20/21 seems to be pressing a bit. Making 3NT won't be a bottom but going down in a higher contract will be very bad if not bottom.

[blackshoe]

As I understand Romex, that hand would open 1NT, not 2NT. Or did you mean you play Romex Stayman over a 20-21 2NT opening?

In Romex, systemically, the bidding would go 1NT-2♦-2NT-3♣-3♦-3NT.

[the hog]

Yes, I read the post and had the same reaction as Blackshoe. Romex does not open this hand 2NT but rather 1NT.

[kgr]

blackshoe, on Aug 2 2009, 03:15 AM, said:

As I understand Romex, that hand would open 1NT, not 2NT. Or did you mean you play Romex Stayman over a 20-21 2NT opening?

In Romex, systemically, the bidding would go 1NT-2♦-2NT-3♣-3♦-3NT.

..then the name is probably Romex Stayman.