[mikeh]

skaeran, on Nov 22 2007, 11:39 AM, said:

I'd never ever consider overcalling 2♣ with this hand. I don't see that as an option at all. The suit is too short and too weak. To me it totally misdescribes the hand.

Overcalling 2NT over 2♥ is far better, eventhough the suits differ a lot; diamonds are one card longer and has lots of intermediates. But you'll get the chance to raise partner's presumed club preference one level and help him evaluate his diamond holding at the same time.

And if it goes 3♥ p p you're still alive and can make another bid (preferably 3NT, I don't think double is correct then).

I'm still not confident that 2NT is the perfect bid, but it's absolutely clear to me that pass over 1♦ is 100% correct.

I agree.

I have belatedly looked at the thread and agree that partner should raise to 5♣. On the auction it is reasonable to infer that overcaller has, to some degree, relied on our having some modest values because the opps have bid gently. Viewed in that fashion, we might argue that overcaller has bid our hand for us, and so we shouldn't hang him.

But while our hcp may be in line with his expectations, he has hit a home run in terms of honour location: even the club 9 may be important (consider a hand lacking the diamond spots and therefore needing to take some ruffs in the K9xx hand. So we have to raise: as Harald says, aiming for 130 is shooting at a very tiny target.

[jdonn]

I agree with pass over 1♦. I think the decision of partner to bid game or not is extremely close, that's why I never answered since I couldn't decide I think it will make just less than half the time opposite partner's range of hands.

[Edmunte1]

mike777, on Nov 22 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

2) Agree with Sabine comment...bid 2clubs over 1D anytime, anywhere.

I don't think Sabine would have bid 2♣ with that hand, as long as diamonds can be easily the right strain

[skjaeran]

Jlall, on Nov 22 2007, 07:26 PM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 22 2007, 08:25 AM, said:

Jlall, on Nov 22 2007, 12:36 PM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 22 2007, 07:22 AM, said:

skaeran, on Nov 22 2007, 11:49 AM, said:

My hand: ♠AT ♥v ♦KJT962 ♣AQ743
(...) Surely I'd have bid the same with ♠QT, but going for exactly +130 is too small a target IMO.

Or ♠AT ♥2 ♦KJT96 ♣AQ743, for that matter

except that he would never ever bid this way with this hand, and his auction must be 6-5.

that's ridiculous.

the suggestion that partner would bid 3D over 2H with 5-5 is ridiculous actually.

Agree. That would be an absolute blindingly obvious 2NT.

[whereagles]

Actually, it's ridiculous not to bid 2NT with 55 or better. But since the original auction featured a ridiculous 3♦ bid on a 65, it's totally normal to assume the same 3♦ would be bid on a 55.

The actual auction should be more like a 6-4 since pard can pass 3♦ (as he did!!!). Eventually a 6-5 with much better diams.

[Winstonm]

I am way late to this thread so disregard anything already covered.

I would bid 5D - partner's auction suggests a powerful 64 or even 74 hand with short hearts. These types hands almost always play better in the long suit. The diamond Q is surely a huge card but entries could be a problem in a club contract after taking heart taps in the 4-4 fit.

I imagine a hand opposite such as Kx, x, AKJxxx, AQxx or possibly A, x, AKxxxxx, AQxx.

Although it is NV, there is still a bonus for game and I would think this one no worse than 50/50.