Posted 2012-February-23, 18:43
Lots of meat on these bones.
I don't like 3N. Our diamonds are paradoxically too long and too strong. This holding makes it very likely that LHO won't lead diamonds....his suit is weak and probably relatively short. This in turn increases the likelihood of a major suit, and (since we have 2 spades and 3 hearts) he'll lead spades slightly more often than hearts, altho either major could be a killer.
In addition, many players will stretch a little to bid 2♣ over a 1♦ opener, hence we need to hold back a little here, compared to say [1♠] 2♣ where overcaller is more likely to hold full values.
Finally, most good players will tend to raise 2N to 3N aggressively if they hold 6+ clubs, and, since our diamond suit isn't likely to be readily establishable, we probably need 6 clubs or a full opening hand to make game.
Thus, if I were to bid notrump immediately, it would be 2N.
The alternative is 2♦, at least in the posted methods. For what it may be worth, I think transfers are a better idea, but they don't 'solve' this hand.
Over 2♥. my spade holding scares me. What would 2♠ mean?
I think it ought to be natural, forcing for one round, and showing a 4 card holding.
We won't have 5+, since we bid 2♠ with that, not 2♦.
To those who respond that we don't need to check back for spades, my reply is that you should learn to appreciate the power of moysian major suit fits.
So I'd have to choose between 2N and 3♣.
The problem is that I think both of these calls are forcing! 3♣ more or less has to be.....how else do we establish a forcing club sequence?
And 2N....if we had an invitational hand, we'd have bid 2N earlier.
All of this brings me back to my original choice of 2N.
I may be being guilty of double dummy thinking, but in my view N should pull 2N to 3♣. S's hand is maximum for 2N, and so N should be expecting a touch less as an average hand. Assuming imps, safety is important and if we are not bidding game, we have to bid 3♣. It would be no surprise to us that EW have at least 9 spades. Even at mps, I think there is a great deal to be said for 3♣. Leaving aside the risk of going down, 3♣ might score 130 against 120.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari