NickRW, on Feb 2 2010, 10:45 PM, said:
jdonn, on Feb 2 2010, 04:11 AM, said:
You're repeating the same logic I don't understand
I think what he is saying is that it is very hard, in general, to predict that 2NT will be an exact make - a lot of the time it is over or under - further it requires very little more to make 3NT. Thus, particularly in an IMP context, where a) stretching to game can pay a dividend and b] there is virtually no difference between +120 for 2NT and, say, +110 for 3m, giving up on 2NT as a possible contract makes sense on a lot of sequences.
Matchpoints are a different kettle of fish, +120 can be a top.
Nick
Thanks Nick.

Help
