Partner bids 3NT

[Hanoi5]

Red vs White, you hold:

 

♠xx

♥KQJT8xx

♦Qxx

♣x

 

Bidding goes:

 

1NT* 2♣* Pa 2♦*

Pa 2♥ Pa 3NT

Pa ???

 

Where 1NT shows 12-14, 2♣ is a one-suited hand, and 2♦ asks about which suit. Do you pass 3NT or take it out to 4♥?

[TimG]

If I take it out, partner will hold ♠QJT ♥Ax ♦Jxxxx ♣AKx. I'm sure you can construct hands where 4♥ makes while 3NT fails, but I told partner what I have and he made a decision, that's good enough for me.

[pooltuna]

Red vs White, you hold:

 

♠xx

♥KQJT8xx

♦Qxx

♣x

 

Bidding goes:

 

1NT* 2♣* Pa 2♦*

Pa 2♥ Pa 3NT

Pa ???

 

Where 1NT shows 12-14, 2♣ is a one-suited hand, 2♦ and asks about which suit. Do you pass 3NT or take it out to 4♥?

 

This auction should be a pass or correct auction that promises at the very minimum the ♥32 or maybe the singleton ♥A. In any event 4♥ IMO rates to be a better contract

[mikeh]

I take it out.

 

I think it is very close, because the diamond Queen may be an entry, but I'd be worried that in 3N he will need to drive out the heart A and have the diamond as an entry. Put another way, this hand is not what he is probably expecting. I am not criticizing the overcall, but I suspect that if we were to create an example or two of what we are likely to hold for 2♥ red v white, most hands would have more hcp, and more stuff outside the suit. That would certainly be true in my partnerships (tho it would also be true that we'd be bidding here....2♦ transfer to 2♥, usually).

 

 

I suspect that at equal or favourable, this hand would be bidding 3♥ rather than 2.

 

 

Obviously, it is easy to create a lot of hands on which 3N is better...I just think they are going to be fewer in number than the ones on which 4♥ is better.

[Phil]

Was a direct 3♥ available or would that show a better hand? I would rather show my hand with one call than make partner guess with a good 14 (missing the ♥A) in the actual sequence.

 

On balance, 4♥ has to be better, but I am prepared to apologize if that is wrong. (killer instinct/on)

[gwnn]

I take it out, obviously pass can also be right, and my experience is similar to TimG's, but I will just trust my simple minded rules which have only abandoned me 50% of the time and rebid my 7 card suit.

[MrAce]

Of course i take it out. Partner bid 2♦ for god's sake, he wants to sit on 2♦ if our suit was ♦. Doesn't that tell u something ? :D

 

That means partner is doing something that doesn't make sense. Don't let him declare a hand :P

[nigel_k]

I don't play this method and I can't see how the auction makes sense unless 2♦ is forcing so I'm not going to draw any inference from partner's decision to use 2♦ rather than bid a new suit or 3NT directly. There may very well be some inferences but I don't know what they are.

 

We haven't told partner what he have. We could have quite a different hand and there isn't any obvious way for him to offer a choice of games with a hand such as AKxx x Jxx AQJxx. Certainly he hasn't guaranteed Ax of hearts and we will struggle in 3NT any time he doesn't have it.

 

So I would pull to 4♥.

[nige1]

Red vs White, you hold: ♠ xx ♥ KQJT8xx ♦ Qxx ♣ x

1NT* 2♣* Pa 2♦*

Pa 2♥ Pa 3NT

Pa ???

Where 1NT shows 12-14, 2♣ is a one-suited hand, 2♦ and asks about which suit. Do you pass 3NT or take it out to 4♥?

Agree with everybody. IMO 4♥ = 10, _P = 6.

[dake50]

What would an immediate 3H mean?

Have I already denied this hand by not 3H?

Can't chance 3NT disaster when 4H is not.

[Free]

I take it out. We don't have an entry and the suit may block (singleton Ace) or partner may not even have ♥A in which case our source of tricks is useless.

[mtvesuvius]

I'm bidding 4♥. I'd expect more high cards and less hearts from a partner who bid 2♣ over a Weak NT... Or at least more high cards. I don't see any reason why this suit is supposedly going to be set up in time, and I think partner is expecting more. I think of 4♥ as a mutant between "damage control" and "bidding to make".