[cnszsun]

Scoring: IMP

2♦-ps-2N-ps
3♦-ps-??

2♦=weak 2
3♦=min,no short suit

---

[gwnn]

i'm not bidding 3 no, they're leading through partner's hoped for spade stopper. If he has a good spade stop then his diamonds must be terrible! ♠QJx with ♦Axxxxx I guess could be described as a minimum but even with that hand 5♦ will be OK. As opposed to that we have Kx of spades or xx or diamonds with no ace (admittedly unlikely).

[Fluffy]

I would try 3♥ to involve partner a bit more.

[pooltuna]

cnszsun, on Sep 6 2009, 05:33 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

2♦-ps-2N-ps
3♦-ps-??

2♦=weak 2
3♦=min,no short suit

---

5♦; You have 11 tricks in 6♦, 3♥, & 2♣. Partner is a favorite to have only 2♠ as 2362 and 2263 combined should be more probable than 3262. Perhaps my view is colored by my expectation after 2NT that he has no outside K or A so I do not expect Jxx Qx JT9xxx Qx or similar.

[nigel_k]

Agree with pooltuna's reasoning that 5♦ is better, provided partner is guaranteed to have 6 diamonds. 3NT if not.

[peachy]

Partner denied a singleton so I am bidding 3NT and expecting spades 4-4. They can cash four spades and we get the rest. If we don't get the rest when spades are 4-4, then we were not going to make 5D either. Also, they might not lead spades.

[Bende]

peachy, on Sep 7 2009, 08:11 AM, said:

Partner denied a singleton so I am bidding 3NT and expecting spades 4-4. They can cash four spades and we get the rest. If we don't get the rest when spades are 4-4, then we were not going to make 5D either. Also, they might not lead spades.

Why do we expect spades to be 4-4?

[bid_em_up]

gwnn, on Sep 6 2009, 05:51 AM, said:

If he has a good spade stop then his diamonds must be terrible! ♠QJx with ♦Axxxxx ....

I think we could tell that simply by looking at our own diamond holding!!

pooltuna, on Sep 6 2009, 07:47 AM, said:

5♦; You have 11 tricks in 6♦, 3♥, & 2♣.

Maybe, but then again, they may be able to cash 3 spades first.

Bende, on Sep 7 2009, 02:48 AM, said:

peachy, on Sep 7 2009, 08:11 AM, said:

Partner denied a singleton so I am bidding 3NT and expecting spades 4-4.  They can cash four spades and we get the rest.  If we don't get the rest when spades are 4-4, then we were not going to make 5D either. Also, they might not lead spades.

Why do we expect spades to be 4-4?

Wishful thinking?

I think this is the wrong way to approach the problem. If spades are 4-4, 5D will make whenever 3N does, for the same score at IMP's, so our concern really should be what happens when spades are not 4-4. Ok, if diamonds are 4-0, and partner has the club Q and the diamond Ace, we would have 9 tricks in NT and 5D will go down, however, this is too specific to worry about, imo.

If a spade is not led (against either contract), both 3N and 5D will again likely make, regardless of how spades break, so this isn't a consideration either.

However, 5D gains when partner holds two small spades, spades are not 4-4 and a spade IS led.

This leads me to choose 5D over 3N.

jmoo.

[Jlall]

Obviously if partner has a doubleton spade we would all bid 5D (I hope!). The reason to think about playing 3N is the times that partner has three spades and you can lose the first 3 whereas you will make 3N usually.

[cherdanno]

Jlall, on Sep 8 2009, 02:04 PM, said:

Obviously if partner has a doubleton spade we would all bid 5D (I hope!). The reason to think about playing 3N is the times that partner has three spades and you can lose the first 3 whereas you will make 3N usually.

Yeah, but a doubleton spade seems just so much more likely than three of them.

[Jlall]

cherdanno, on Sep 8 2009, 02:20 PM, said:

Jlall, on Sep 8 2009, 02:04 PM, said:

Obviously if partner has a doubleton spade we would all bid 5D (I hope!). The reason to think about playing 3N is the times that partner has three spades and you can lose the first 3 whereas you will make 3N usually.

Yeah, but a doubleton spade seems just so much more likely than three of them.

Agreed, not saying I would bid 3N, I just thought it was LOL that the discussion about bidding 3N vs 5D all assumed partner had a doubleton spade.

I think bidding 3S would be kind of sexy to deflect the spade lead against 5D though.

[mtvesuvius]

5♦. Although I like the idea of either 3♥ to involve partner a bit, or 3♠ to deflect a ♠ lead, I guess I'd probably just blast it at the table.

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Sep 8 2009, 08:31 PM, said:

I think bidding 3S would be kind of sexy to deflect the spade lead against 5D though.

3♠ is natural here, isn't it? If partner raises and you go back to 5♦, everyone will know 3♠ was a psyche. And if he doesn't raise you don't mind a spade lead anyway.