am I being unreasonable?

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa8hkq985dqt9cq98&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1dp1hp2dp]133|200[/hv]

 

your bid? "Standard methods" , the only forcing bid here is 2♠,3♣

[mike777]

I guess my options are:

2nt

3d

3nt

 

I will try 3nt but....

[mgoetze]

If your partner opens all 11s NV, like I do, then 2NT could work out quite well here - we don't necessarily have a game and partner could still offer 3 hearts en passant.

[jillybean]

Partner opens only good 11 ccounts.

[TylerE]

3unt

[1eyedjack]

You bid 3C, right? Not unreasonable, I think. If partner has nothing in Spades then a 5-2 H fit may yet be right.

[the hog]

2S to stop 3NT being wrongsided and also to see if pd does happen to have 3H.

[mcphee]

I do not see the problem, I force to game we will play in 3N 4H or 5D.

[MrAce]

Partner opens only good 11 ccounts.

 

Even if he opens all 10 counts you have to go for game with this. Even if you count this hand 13 hcp, which would be a huge evaluation disability, you should still go for game. And yes this is for MP, at IMPs even thinking of just inviting is as bad as actually doing it imho.

[trevahound]

3♣, right? Is there a trick? I promise I open worse than your partner does and I'm still shooting it out with somewhere.

 

Put another way; you have to choose right now (magically): safe level? or right strain? If it's "safe level", then we play different games.

[akwoo]

3♣ should be artificial in this sequence and considered as part of extended new minor forcing.

 

So 3♣ it is.

[helene_t]

Imo 2s should be the artificial force. It is cheaper, and we are less likely to have a spade fit

[MrAce]

How about both of them being the artificial forcing suit and we use them flexible and conveniently depending on our hand, sometimes to right side the 3 NT and sometimes to keep the auction economic if our intention is to go beyond 3 NT or for whatever reason we choose one over the other?

[PhilKing]

If you want an even simpler solution, you can play that in any sequence where opener has promised a six card or longer suit, 2NT is forcing.

 

If partscore is the limit, it is very unlikely that 2NT is your best spot.

 

JB needs more gadgets imo. B-)

[whereagles]

This is a situation where standard methods have moderate difficulties.

 

The usual way to sort it out is make a forcing bid in fake a suit (which we know pard will never support). Both 2♠ and 3♣ serve the purpose. Spades keeps bidding lower, clubs is a lesser distortion. I think I would go with clubs.

 

HOWEVER... if you decide the hand is not worth a game force (I personally think it is), then it becomes easy: just bid 3♦. If pard accepts the invite, he'll bid 3♥ with 3 cards there and you recapture the heart game.

[ahydra]

2S is good here if you agree it may not be 4 cards. Otherwise 3C. If partner doesn't show us heart support we go for 3NT.

 

ahydra

[kgr]

2♠

Allows partner to show 3c♥ and maybe opps will not lead killing ♠ if we play 3NT (I will force to game, what 2♠ already did in fact).

[gszes]

I am unclear what we are trying to accomplish with this question.

If the question is game or no game I choose game (or slam) with the

only problems being what strain and how high. There are probably a

(relative) thimble full of hands where stopping short of game is right

so let us ignore those and try to figure out where to play this hand.

 

Of all the possible hands p might have our best chance at making slam

is if p is short in clubs because that requires the least overall in the

way of assets. xxx Axx AKxxxx x. I say this because if we were to choose

3c as our next bid it would go a long way to making sure we avoid slam.

It might also lead us astray into 3n when 5 or 6d might be right instead.

 

2S

 

On the other hand not only keeps the bidding lower (not by much) but leaves

open the chances of slam depending on how the bidding proceeds. The one big

major benefit of 2s over 3c may easily be the ability to show doubt about

NT. Over 2s if p bids 2n it is easy for us to now bid 3d to show some doubt

about spade "stuff" by bidding 3d. This in turn might find p making bids such

as 3h or finding our way to 6d if p happens to be short in spades with some

extra values.

[jillybean]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa8hkq985dqt9cq98&n=s973ha6dakj6432c6&d=w&v=0&b=14&a=p1dp1hp2dp3n]266|200[/hv]

 

 

I'm North here and I'm thinking slam, not game. After I heard 3N, I pushed to slam, UNfortunately the wrong slam which was entirely my fault.

 

Partner and I had a good discussion about this hand afterwards, I thought the 3N bid makes it very difficult for me and if he is going to

game, why not temporize with 3♣ and hear what more I have to say.

[helene_t]

I would have passed 3NT. Your hand is quit tightly defined by the 2♦ bid so partner must know what he is doing.

 

Partner's 3NT bid is premature, though. He can always bid a black suit, fishing for heart support. It will still be difficult to bid this slam, though. Maybe you would bid 4♦ after South's 2♠ or 3♣ bid. I think South would just bid 5♦ then.

[aguahombre]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa8hkq985dqt9cq98&n=s973ha6dakj6432c6&d=w&v=0&b=14&a=p1dp1hp2dp3n]266|200[/hv]

 

I'm North here and I'm thinking slam, not game. After I heard 3N, I pushed to slam, fortunately the wrong slam which was entirely my fault.

Whether we like South's jump to 3NT or not is moot. The key meta-rule is:

 

When you have made a description of your hand, and partner places the contract in 3NT, IT IS TIME TO STOP THINKING and get ready to put down your hand as dummy.

 

If you think you haven't adequately described your hand, that ship has sailed. The time to think about that was when you rebid 2D.

[ArtK78]

1) I play 3♣ in this sequence as extended new minor forcing, so that is the call that I would make. Even if I did not play 3♣ as artificial, that is probably the call that I would make.

 

2) A couple of posters have stated that, for lack of a better phrase, 3NT ends all auctions. The actual hand shows how silly that can be. 6♦ is cold barring a 5-1 heart split. This can be attributed to South failing to appreciate the possibility that there is a slam here when he holds QT9 in support of a rebid diamond suit. Maybe that will become clear if he bids 3♣ and hears 3♦ by North. Or maybe 6♦ is just too difficult to bid.

 

North could help partner out by bidding 3♥ rather than 3♦ over 3♣. Or, if South insists on bidding 3NT over 3♦, maybe North should then bid 4♥. It would be nice to know whether this hand was played at IMPs or at matchpoints. At matchpoints, it is far more tempting to play in 3NT rather than explore for slam and risk playing in 5♦. That is not a problem at IMPs (other than the fact that 5♦ might be too high).

[Wackojack]

2) A couple of posters have stated that, for lack of a better phrase, 3NT ends all auctions. The actual hand shows how silly that can be. 6♦ is cold barring a 5-1 heart split. This can be attributed to South failing to appreciate the possibility that there is a slam here when he holds QT9 in support of a rebid diamond suit. Maybe that will become clear if he bids 3♣ and hears 3♦ by North. Or maybe 6♦ is just too difficult to bid.

 

The basic problem I think is that 1♦- rebid 2♦has such a wide range in Standard. Here North has 7 playing tricks and I would value this a worth a jump to 3♦. Then the slam is easy to reach. Acollers who play a strong 2♦ (perhaps a dying breed) would happily rebid 3♦. And multi 2♦ers who incorporate a near game minor could do so also. How strong do the posters play a rebid of 3♦?

[akwoo]

I don't think this is a bad slam to miss. Switch either player's black suits and moving beyond 3N is okay at IMPs and very bad at MPs.

[aguahombre]

The basic problem I think is that 1♦- rebid 2♦has such a wide range in Standard. Here North has 7 playing tricks and I would value this a worth a jump to 3♦. Then the slam is easy to reach. Acollers who play a strong 2♦ (perhaps a dying breed) would happily rebid 3♦. And multi 2♦ers who incorporate a near game minor could do so also. How strong do the posters play a rebid of 3♦?

Yes, this is sort of my point. Some might even call that hand 8 playing tricks.

 

Art is right, in a way, when he says "3NT ends all auctions is silly". But, I gave some caveats...that removing 3NT (if it is bid to play) is not the time to decide we are unhappy with our previous auction.

 

This board should launch a discussion in the bar afterwards..after the 3NT contract made most of the matchpoints or went down after they ran 5 club tricks.

 

The discussion would involve the decision to rebid 2D and the 3NT Jump, and how they might have gotten to 6D if one or both of them had made different choices. Don't bother with what happened after 3NT was pulled on the actual board; you can't shine crap. Don't bother with adding gadgets, here; this isn't a gadget hand unless you call control bidding a gadget.