Oh what a tangled web we weave...

[benlessard]

Passing make no sense, our 6th diamond is almost worth an ace. Nobody would pass 2Nt with

 

xx

KQJ

AKQJT

xxx

 

yet our hand is better than this.

 

The main point of the hand is what is our upside to compensate the information that we will give to the opponents ?

 

1- is it possible that 3D is a much better contract than 3Nt and if so will we reach it ?

 

2- is it possible 5D is a better contract than 3Nt and if so can we reach it.

 

I think its clear that the information you will give to the opps is more costly.

 

 

So 3Nt.

[MFA]

Pass.

The right evaluation imo. There will a lot of 120's out there, so 2NT is ok.

[aguahombre]

Ben seems to have nailed it, at least IMHO. Would be interested in what the actual hand was, where 2NT made exactly 2, Partner had a legitimate invite, and 2D at the other table went down. Lall Senior is a quality player, assume quality partner and opponents in the IMP event.

 

Assume also that he calculated the IMP odds. His gain of 6 or 7 on this particular hand was certainly a good result.

[Phil]

There will a lot of 120's out there, so 2NT is ok.

Only one 120. Its teams.

 

I would pass at MPs.

[Jlall]

Ben seems to have nailed it, at least IMHO. Would be interested in what the actual hand was, where 2NT made exactly 2, Partner had a legitimate invite, and 2D at the other table went down. Lall Senior is a quality player, assume quality partner and opponents in the IMP event.

 

Assume also that he calculated the IMP odds. His gain of 6 or 7 on this particular hand was certainly a good result.

I *think* it was KJ9x xxxx Tx Axx in dummy.

 

LHO underled the heart ace vs 2N. My partner did not underlead the HA vs 2D and AQ of spades were off.

[Cascade]

If this is maximum for your 15-17 1NT what does a minimum (with six diamonds) look like?

2NT doesn't say "Are you maximum?", it says "Should we be in 3NT?"

And this happens on what range of hands?

 

On what basis do you decide whether you should be in 3NT?

[gnasher]

2NT doesn't say "Are you maximum?", it says "Should we be in 3NT?"

And this happens on what range of hands?

 

On what basis do you decide whether you should be in 3NT?

It's plausible to bid 3NT on any maximum, and also any hand with a solid 6-card minor that was systemically a 1NT opening. I'm not saying that I do follow that approach, but it's not illogical to do so.

[cherdanno]

If this is maximum for your 15-17 1NT what does a minimum (with six diamonds) look like?

2NT doesn't say "Are you maximum?", it says "Should we be in 3NT?"

And this happens on what range of hands?

 

On what basis do you decide whether you should be in 3NT?

I imagine partner having a balanced 8 count and decided whether we will more likely gain IMPs in 3NT or in 2NT.

[MFA]

There will a lot of 120's out there, so 2NT is ok.

Only one 120. Its teams.

 

I would pass at MPs.

Sorry. Actually, what I meant was that there are many layouts out there that will lead to 120. I did notice the form of scoring. :P