6-5, red vs. white...

[foobar]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq876hkt876dj2c&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1c1s2dp3d]133|200[/hv]

[neilkaz]

4♥ for me think optimistically.

 

EDIT:You guys have convinced me that 4♥ is too dangerous and pd is still there. I change my vote to 3♥

[ahydra]

Can I not start with 2C?

 

Given the auction, I'll try 3H. Should show a good hand - with shape too, as we haven't doubled - and partner will know to value cards in the majors higher. While I expect partner to fit one or both majors, there's a good chance partner is pretty much bust.

 

ahydra

[steve2005]

I think 2♣ would have worked better. 4♥ might be right. But with 2 probable ♦ losers and opponents potentially very strong. 4♥ could be very expensive if wrong.

At least if we had bid 2♣ we might know if we have a fit.

[Tramticket]

3♥

 

Must be based on shape.

 

No, I would not have started with 2♣.

[gszes]

this hand has more than enough power to invite partner (by bidding 2s) when they bid a simple 2h (over a pass vs 2d) after my 2c michaels. If you think about how the bidding might proceed you will see the tremendous advantage of getting partner involved in the decision making process early in the hand. I see so many 3h bidders at unfavorable and I will bet a ton most are doing that because NOW they want to try and get partner involved but they are doing it a level higher and taking a much greater risk. The opps have had a chance to exchange a fair amount of information and doubles could start flying around quickly. I ask all the 3h bidders what would you have done if the bidding had gone 1c 2c 2d pass 3d? I would pass how about you?

[JanisW]

Honestly, I would love to be in 3♥X. Since Partner did not pull to 3♠ there should be a reasonable number of rounded red cards in his hand. If I had one more Honour in ♥ I would've bid 4♥ on my own. I have very good chances of making opposite as little as x,Jxx,xxx,xxxxxx.

 

My hand is strong enough to involve partner at the 3-level and my ♠ are much stronger than my ♥. If the A♠ were the A♥ and I still was 6-5 I'd very much approve of 2♣ because my suits are almost equal in strength and I agree with your opinion to involve P early.

 

regards

JW

[Phil]

2!c to start. Now I bid 3!h which sounds like 65 since I could x with 64.

 

4H is an overbid.

[rmnka447]

I'm bidding 3 ♥ now. It ought to be a perfect description of this hand in this auction.

 

I don't like an initial Michaels because of the poor quality of the ♥ suit. Make the hand something like AKxxxx KQ10xx Jx -, then I'd consider a Michaels bid right.

[foobar]

Thanks for the responses. When it was played, I was feeling adventurous, and tried 4♥, propelling the opponents to 5♦. The problem is that the auction for our side didn't end there :D , and now pard wanted to have a say with xxx xxxx xx Kxxx.

 

Needless to say, it wasn't pretty, though they were cold for a ♦ grand with matching voids in the majors and K♣ in the slot.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq876hkt876dj2c&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1c1s2dp3d]133|200|

I agree with gszes that 2♣ is better than 1♠

 

Now, I rank

1. 3♥ = NAT

2. 4♥ = NAT

 

I sympathize with partner's 5♥ effort,

feel that you were unlucky.

but suppose that you might double 7♦ in the hope of an unusual lead,

[/hv]