multiple options

[hanp]

Partner had xx 109xxxx x AQJ10. The club finesse is off but the spade finesse is on, 6H makes.

[JLOGIC]

Partner had xx 109xxxx x AQJ10. The club finesse is off but the spade finesse is on, 6H makes.

This is a minimum w/r??

[benlessard]

This is a minimum w/r??

That why I say crap or not so crappy isntead of saying minimum or maximum when NV.

[Apollo81]

If you ask with 2NT, partner bids 3C, minimal with hearts.

LOL, i guess that means I was passing after 2♦-4♦-4♥.

You don't bid slam opposite a maximum with hearts then which seems bad. I don't really understand the benefit of your auction over starting with 2N.

You end up declarer in 6M and then opponents lead through partner's ♣Kx? It seems like there's a strong reason to make partner declarer somehow. Is there a systemic way to do this after he shows a min?

 

I was pretty much assuming he had spades. Guess I shouldn't be doing that since it's favorable.

[pooltuna]

Partner had xx 109xxxx x AQJ10. The club finesse is off but the spade finesse is on, 6H makes.

This is a minimum w/r??

you are just upset about the robust ♥ suit ;)

[effervesce]

I dislike 2♥ opening on that too. The hand has more playing strength than a simple weak 2♥, especially W/R. And more importantly, the hand is better described by passing first and then showing the two other suits.

[keylime]

I like 4♦ much more than I do 2NT.

 

Consider LHO coming in with a four level minor preempt over 2NT. Now you might steer them into a cheap game/sac, even at these negative colors.

[gnasher]

I like 4♦ much more than I do 2NT.

 

Consider LHO coming in with a four level minor preempt over 2NT. Now you might steer them into a cheap game/sac, even at these negative colors.

We have a 20-count opposite a weak two, and the opponents are at adverse. I don't think we should worry too much about enemy intervention.

 

Anyway, who plays

  2♦ pass 2NT 4♣

as preemptive?

[hrothgar]

I'm torn on this one.

 

Punting 6♠ is really attractive... Even if we're off the AK of clubs, the opponents probably need to cash them off the top. A quick, informative auction to a plausible contract could very easily be better than a slow exploration that results in a lead directing double.

 

Balanced against this, getting partner to declare could be worth a lot, especially if he had the magic "two black Kings" construction.

 

I think that I'd punt it...

[keylime]

Gnasher,

 

Once never knows these days the acumen of bridge players. I personally play 4♣ as a good playing hand not preemptive in this seat. And, then again, most players haven't discussed defending the multi in 4th seat much.

[barryallen]

I would be so confident partner never had 6 hearts to the 10, I would consider bidding 2♥ over the 2♦ opening and responding 3NT to the expected 2♠ response.

[JLOGIC]

I would be so confident partner never had 6 hearts to the 10, I would consider bidding 2♥ over the 2♦ opening and responding 3NT to the expected 2♠ response.

wat

[OleBerg]

I would be so confident partner never had 6 hearts to the 10, I would consider bidding  2♥ over the 2♦ opening and responding 3NT to the expected 2♠ response.

FYP

[JLOGIC]

I would be so confident partner never had 6 hearts to the 10, I would consider bidding  2♥ over the 2♦ opening and responding 3NT to the expected 2♠ response.

FYP

it's wat, wot, and wut all at the same time Oo

[barryallen]

I would be so confident partner never had 6 hearts to the 10, I would consider bidding  2♥ over the 2♦ opening and responding 3NT to the expected 2♠ response.

FYP

it's wat, wot, and wut all at the same time Oo

;) Thank you for the effort, or was that the 9:38 reconstruction recycled?

 

My comment was in response to the post tempted to blast 6♠ and an inference to what players find acceptable to open a weak 2 with. Not saying it does not work as I expect most have seen on occasions. Just questioning how partner can proceed with any certainty, when all your points are more defensive, with zero attacking.