Simple bidding but

[dcvetkov]

[hv=n=skqxhaq10xxdxxxckq&s=sxxhkxdaj8ca1098xx]133|200|[/hv]

 

IMP Pairs

 

Recently, we missed the best game on these cards and landed in unmakeable 5C, due to 4-1 clubs.

 

I ll give you two auctions, none of them was the actual one. Please elaborate which one you like better and why, and if you are forced to bid like Option 2, what is your interpretation of 3 Spade bid ( Option 1 or 2)

 

Thanks

 

1)

South North

1♣ 1♥

2♣ 2♦*

3♣ 3NT

 

2)

South North

1♣ 1♥

2♣ 2♦*

3♣ 3♠**

 

* Alerted, asks for further description

 

** 1) Partner, I want to try 3NT, I have spade stopper, but I was only joking about diamonds. If you have diamonds stopped please bid 3NT

 

** 2) Partner, I want to try 3NT, but I worry about spades. I have partial or shaky stopper, (Qxx) If you can help , please bid 3NT, if not we will try game in clubs

[marcD]

really strange idea to bid 2♦ instead of 2♠. Given that I would choose option 2 but why torture partner ?

[pclayton]

I would read 3♠ as your 2nd option. Agree with the bidding in the 1st section.

 

By the way, I'll make a shameless plug for 3♣ over 2♣ as forcing. The auction glides effortlessly to 3N, without any guesswork:

 

1♣ - 1♥ - 2♣ - 3♣ - 3♦ - 3N.

[Guest movingon]

Why not bid 2 hearts instead of 3 clubs after partner bids the 2 diamonds?

[benlessard]

2S by north is a much better bid than 2D. But if you really like 2D then south should rebid 2H to suggest a minimum hand.

[Echognome]

Agree,

 

1♣ - 1♥

2♣ - 2♦ (most play as ART)

2♥ - 2♠

2NT - 3NT

 

Seems like a good auction to me.

[skjaeran]

With my regular we'd bid:

1♣ - 1♦ (TRF)

2♣ - 2♦ (TRF!)

2♥ - 2♠ (values (or 5-6))

2NT - 3NT