[benlessard]

---

All is natural, no discussion with a "A" player that i rarely play with.

[aguahombre]

If I have shown what I hold, I don't really need to know why partner envisions game in the 4-3 fit; I will find that out when the dummy comes down. My stuff is prime for suit play, not soft and notrumpish; so she is probably right.

[gnasher]

4♠ looks obvious. Maybe partner has something like KQx Kxxxx xx xxx or KQx xxxx xxx Axx.

[benlessard]

Ive bid 4H thinking that it should show Hx and decent spades because IMO Ive already denied having 3H by bidding 2NT do you agree ?

The side question is that if partner has 5 decent H and 3 good S will bid 3H or 3S ?

[madongjun]

Could opened 1NT?

[PhilKing]

Partner bids diamonds, spades, raises no trumps and now you worry about getting back to hearts?

3♥ over 2NT should definitely not show good hearts - it's a baby Bluhmer.

[gnasher]

After the auction to 2NT, I think you might still want to play in hearts. I think 3♥ just shows something like ♥KQJxx and a flakey club stop. With the baby-Bluhmer type, you will usually have a hand suitable for 3♦ or 3♠.

[helene_t]

I was thinking that p has diamond shortness and that I'd bid 3NT because I don't really need to ruff diamonds. But maybe I do need it, lol.

[PhilKing]

gnasher, on 2013-May-31, 04:10, said:

After the auction to 2NT, I think you might still want to play in hearts. I think 3♥ just shows something like ♥KQJxx and a flakey club stop. With the baby-Bluhmer type, you will usually have a hand suitable for 3♦ or 3♠.

The hand you describe is sounding rather like: ♠Jxx♥KQJxx♦xx♣Qxx? It sounds a bit weird to me. Am I playing pard for: ♠AQxx♥Ax♦KQJxx♣Jx? I'll take my chances in 3NT. For me, 3♠:

♠Kxx
♥Axxxx
♦x
♣Jxxx

I'm nailed on to have a stiff diamond, so partner can visualise whether a cross-ruff/scramble is appropriate.

3♥:

♠Kxx
♥xxxx
♦Kx
♣Kxxx

It's pretty specific.

3♣ would be the same with five decent clubs and 2425 or similar.

[gnasher]

PhilKing, on 2013-May-31, 04:26, said:

The hand you describe is sounding rather like: ♠Jxx♥KQJxx♦xx♣Qxx? It sounds a bit weird to me. Am I playing pard for: ♠AQxx♥Ax♦KQJxx♣Jx?

No, you're playing partner for AKxx Ax KQJxx xx or KQxx Ax AKJxx xx.

[jogs]

gnasher, on 2013-May-30, 02:45, said:

4♠ looks obvious. Maybe partner has something like KQx Kxxxx xx xxx or KQx xxxx xxx Axx.

If pard holds the right cards 4♠ is on.
If pard holds the wrong cards 3♠ is iffy.
Kxx Qxxxx xx KJx.

[benlessard]

IMO any hand with half a stopper partner will bid 3C over 2Nt.

I also think that with a 18-19 balanced I will bid 3NT because im using 2NT for 16-17 with 5D. So in a strong NT setup my hand cannot be balanced.

[gnasher]

jogs, on 2013-May-31, 07:01, said:

If pard holds the right cards 4♠ is on.
If pard holds the wrong cards 3♠ is iffy.
Kxx Qxxxx xx KJx.

If partner holds the wrong cards for his bidding, it's hardly surprising that you reach the wrong contract.

[gszes]

p wishes to accept game try but feels it is possible that
four spades (43 fit) may be superior to 3n. IMO this opinion
is much more likely to be correct if responder has a partial
dia fit and no club stopper and a max. Something like

KQx Kxxxx Qx xxx

If the 1d 1h 1s auction did not promise an unbalanced hand then
responder might even have a hand like KQx Kxxxx Qxx xx where they
could not bid 2d and had to choose 1n.

3d (over 2n) would have sounded like a sign off and a fear of nt and
weak so that bid was unavailable. The lack of a club stopper makes
responder (rightly) fear 3n so responder is offering opener a variety
of places to play 3s 3n 4d 4h 4s 5d might all be reasonable
choices for opener (though passing 3s would be more of a unilateral
decision with a very low % probability of being right).

It has been suggested that being short in diamonds should be a
requirement but the shortness should instill caution rather making
a bid from which there is no return to safety. A hand similar to
KQx Kxxxx x xxxx should be more than happy to pass 2n rather than
bidding 3s. If clubs are a problem the 4 card spade suit will have
to do the ruffing and there is a really good chance we will need a
33 spade split to bring 4s home (Ive seen worse). With a hand like
KQx KQxxx x xxxx being at tippy top for the bidding one could forgive
a slightly overly aggressive 3s bid since we have a ton of power for
game just not sure if anything is right:))))))

IF the 1d 1h 1s auction promised an unbalanced hand this is even
more crucial since responder could have easily chosen to bid 2/3d vs
1n with a dia fit a hand like KQx Kxxxx Qxx xx