AQTxxxx AQx Qx x

[straube]

2/1 forcing 1N

 

AQTxxxx AQx Qx x

 

1S P 1N P ?

 

worth 3S or not?

[rogerclee]

Yes for sure, 4S is a better bid than 2S but 3S has to be better than either.

[dcohio]

I bid 4♠

 

Partner has shown 6-12, you have a 7 card suit, 5 loser hand. You don't need much to make game. However, you need alot to make slam.

[gwnn]

3♠ is right on the money ;)

[mike777]

Yes for sure, 4S is a better bid than 2S but 3S has to be better than either.

again ditto.

[PhantomSac]

It's on the heavy side for 3S I guess since partner can pass on hands we have game but that's my bid.

[straube]

Partner bid 3N. I passed and I think this is right...but any votes for 4S? or 4H en passant?

[jjbrr]

3♠ for me

[Siegmund]

I prefer 4♠; my 3♠ bid is going to be a bit more in high cards and often only 6 spades. I can understand either bid.

[whereagles]

3♠ is ok, but I think 4 is more descriptive: 1M+4M = a good 4M opening.

[mcphee]

3S, I do not need to reach for game without partners help. If I can make 4 partner will bid it I hope.

[the hog]

Pretty obvious 3S bid.

[gwnn]

Partner bid 3N.  I passed and I think this is right...but any votes for 4S? or 4H en passant?

if your partner is whereagles you damn well better bid 4S :unsure: opposite mikeh (or most people on this forum) you should pass, he promises lots of slow values

[gnasher]

If it went 3♠-3NT, I'd go back to spades. We're not going to make 3NT without bringing in the spades, and the entries for that may not be present. Also, if we have to lose two spades, its asking a lot to expect partner to keep both minors stopped and not have five top losers.

[whereagles]

if your partner is whereagles you damn well better bid 4S :)

I allow my pards to exercise judgement... IF IT TURNS OUT IT WORKS :rolleyes:

[Fluffy]

I'd bid 3♠ without ♦Q, but that would be a minimum 3♠, now I bid 3♠ also and have a maximim.