[S2000magic]

Matchpoints, both vulnerable, LHO deals:

(2♥) - P* - (P) - ?

You hold:

♠ ---
♥ K Q 8
♦ A Q J 10 9 3
♣ K J 10 3

* Noticeable pause, duly brought to your attention by RHO before you bid

So, what's your bid?

(And would it be different without the pause?)

[dkham]

3NT

But maybe we are barred from doing that after partner's pause (which might suggest spades, or at least a few points).

[Phil]

The hitch suggests he wanted to take action but didn't. I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance.

3♦ would be suggested by the pause, but I'm going with 3N.

[S2000magic]

Phil, on 2012-August-16, 11:57, said:

I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance.

You're a physic: 6 spades to the KQJ and the ♥J: 7 HCP.

[billw55]

The hesitation suggests bidding, but I was obviously doing that anyway. I don't think I can reach a conclusion that any particular bid is suggested though. So I can just bid normally, on this round at least. I choose 3♦.

[aguahombre]

Phil, on 2012-August-16, 11:57, said:

The hitch suggests he wanted to take action but didn't. I'm guessing 6 spades and a 9 count for instance.

3♦ would be suggested by the pause, but I'm going with 3N.

If I thought 3NT was a L.A. to 3D, then obviously 3D gives us a chance to avoid him bidding 4S over 3NT; so, I would have to choose 3NT. Now, my CHO has shown what I could already guess would happen without the UI.

I still bid 3D, and accept the ruling if TD thinks 3NT with a spade void was a L.A.

[lycier]

Hi
Who is willing to accept additional suggestibility?

Nothing to do that,but bid 3D,and don't worried about next auctions,it is very important to listen attentively to partner's bid since god know what the hand's distribution is,merely.Helgemo said guess is worse part of this game!

[ggwhiz]

If 3nt works the opps may well claim that you knew pard wasn't broke. I understand the attempt to put yourself at risk (pard bids 4♠) but your obligation is to bid as if partner had made a smooth pass.

3♦ does that opposite a pard who may be broke. Even though we know that's not the case it reverts to a normal as in no damage auction.

[S2000magic]

The problem I see with 3♦ is that 3NT will often be right and partner will have no way to bid it. And it's not as if 3♦ will encourage him to bid 3♠ with some mediocre 4- or 5-card suit and, say, the ♦K or the ♣Q, allowing me to bid 3NT knowing that spades are stopped.

I bid 3NT, fully aware that the opponents might complain to the director. My reasoning was that a) my void in spades strongly suggests that partner will have the suit stopped, b) this may be my last chance to show a heart stopper, c) if I show the heart stopper by bidding 2NT, partner likely won't raise to 3NT on most hands where 3NT is cold, d) I didn't think that partner's pause was all that significant over a weak 2♥, and e) whatever partner's pause, it might have been more a lack of judgment than a seriously borderline hand.

I made 3NT (with a good guess in clubs, but unable to take the (winning) diamond finesse), and RHO said that he thought that 3NT was clear-cut on my hand. (After the auction I told him that he was welcome to call the director, but he deferred.) In any case, I thought that it was an interesting hand, all the more so because of the pause.

[TimG]

I would think that this hand is a bit heavy for 3♦ in balancing position. Doesn't the hitch make 3♦ less dangerous because partner has values and is likely to find a bid?

[sailoranch]

TimG, on 2012-August-17, 14:51, said:

I would think that this hand is a bit heavy for 3♦ in balancing position. Doesn't the hitch make 3♦ less dangerous because partner has values and is likely to find a bid?

Perhaps, but 3♦ also becomes more dangerous because partner may play us for less than we've got and pass while 3NT makes.

[the hog]

This is an obvious 3D bid, hesitation or no hesitation. That is my bid now.

[mikestar13]

the hog, on 2012-August-17, 19:58, said:

This is an obvious 3D bid, hesitation or no hesitation. That is my bid now.

Agree 100%. Partner can cue 3♥ over my 3♦ if he has good cards but no heart stopper. (His most likely holding on my hand plus the bidding, hitch or no).

[P_Marlowe]

3D, and I dont think 3NT is a clear cut bid.

If you really want to read something in the pause, than that partner has values and
spades, i.e. you have a spade stopper.
Bidding 3NT is taking advantage of the UI, biddding 3D is not.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[fromageGB]

P_Marlowe, on 2012-August-20, 05:27, said:

3D, and I dont think 3NT is a clear cut bid.
Bidding 3NT is taking advantage of the UI, biddding 3♦ is not.

Agree absolutely. If any bid can be suggested by the hesitation, it would be spades, never diamonds.

3♦ is forcing, if partner bids spades, I am happy to rebid 3NT.

[S2000magic]

fromageGB, on 2012-August-21, 05:25, said:

Agree absolutely. If any bid can be suggested by the hesitation, it would be spades, never diamonds.

3♦ is forcing, if partner bids spades, I am happy to rebid 3NT.

Why is 3♦ forcing?

[fromageGB]

S2000magic, on 2012-August-21, 07:36, said:

Why is 3♦ forcing?

OK, maybe it isn't for you and (I am sure) others. I don't play 2NT as natural, but Lebensohl. Forces 3♣. Using this, (2♥) p p 2NT p 3♣ p 3♦ is to play, while (2♥) p p 3♦ is forcing. I reckon the hand is too good to insist on playing just in 3♦.

Out of curiosity, if you do play natural 2NT here, do you play 2NT response to partner's takeout double as Lebensohl ? (I think many do.) Why one and not the other? I would think the case for natural 2NT is stronger when partner has shown some strength and implied the other suits with a takeout double, than it is in this position where you would have to have a lot lot more. I think the strength distinctions given by Lebensohl are more important.

[aguahombre]

I would be very surprised if anyone (unless they are confused) plays a 2N balance after:

(2M) p (P) as Good/Bad and/or calls it Lebensohl.

[S2000magic]

fromageGB, on 2012-August-21, 09:21, said:

Out of curiosity, if you do play natural 2NT here, do you play 2NT response to partner's takeout double as Lebensohl ? (I think many do.) Why one and not the other? I would think the case for natural 2NT is stronger when partner has shown some strength and implied the other suits with a takeout double, than it is in this position where you would have to have a lot lot more. I think the strength distinctions given by Lebensohl are more important.

My partner (in this game), while good (and getting better), has an aversion to learning "too many conventions". (He plays with three other partners at various stages of beginner / intermediate and finds it difficult to play vastly different systems with different partners.) So, we don't play Lebensohl (in any form, under any circumstances), and without explicit discussion I wouldn't use 2NT as anything but natural here. And I might not even with explicit discussion (lest he forget and we end up in a silly contract).

I agree with your assessment that we should be playing Lebensohl in many cases; alas, it won't happen.

[quiddity]

fromageGB, on 2012-August-21, 09:21, said:

Out of curiosity, if you do play natural 2NT here, do you play 2NT response to partner's takeout double as Lebensohl ? (I think many do.) Why one and not the other?

Because ditching the 2NT bid makes more sense when partner's hand is better defined with known values.
What do you do with 16 balanced, jump to 3nt?