[rhm]

quiddity, on 2017-February-15, 15:36, said:

This seems inconsistent to me. If bidding has much more to gain then you should be willing to go lower. The fact that you can't go lower seems to indicate that the decision is close.

You are wrong for simple reasons.
When you have a hand with few honors, reducing them tends to have a big impact on the statistical outcome. It increases the risks (partner playing you for a stronger hand) and your chances succeeding in your contract will reduce substantially.
The vote already indicates that for most people the decision is clear the other way.
I am a strong believer that action has mote to gain than to loose, but it does not mean I can go much lower.

I explained that the hand has 3 controls and I would be unlikely to do it with only 2, because for high level contracts you require controls.

Would I bid on say ♠AT9xxx ♥QJTx ♦x ♣xx or on ♠AQxxxx, ♥QTxx, ♦x ♣xx or ♠KQxxxx ♥KJxx ♦x ♣xx?
Maybe, but then some people would argue this to be stronger hands (I disagree).

Rainer Herrmann

[the hog]

I largely agree with Rainer. This is a little weak for me and I would prefer an extra K. I would certainly not object to partner's 2S bid and would not hand a partner for making it. X is awful. Why pay so much attention to those 4 ratty hearts?