[Hanoi5]

The opponents think last board was not good for them but you somehow doubt it. This time you get your hand from the board, count your cards and find this nice hand:

♠AJ8xx
♥AQ92
♦Qxx
♣A

You open 1♠, 2♠ from partner and you...

(You play 2/1, Bergen raises, long-suit tries/It's MP's and no one's vulnerable)

[mtvesuvius]

This is an GF hand in my book. Why blast? I want a ♥ lead anyway.

(Edited, I missed a card...)

[JLOL]

Definitely would drive to game, the question is just whether or not to bid 3H. The upside of 3H is that you might find a 44 or 54 heart fit which definitely looks good on this hand (will often be a trick better than spades). The downside is you give away information a lot and the opponents might not lead a heart or might defend better now. Pretty close, I usually just blast game on this type of hand rather than look for hearts but this hand looks so particularly good for hearts over spades if we find th fit that I think it's worth bidding 3H.

[jdonn]

I only like to bid another suit on a game forcing hand if there is a chance for slam, I would rather hide the information than look for a game in another suit. While there could just possibly be slam (T9x Kxxxxx Ax xx) it is so clearly against the odds that I like just bidding game.

[ArtK78]

Normally, when I hold a 5 loser hand (modified losing trick count) and partner makes a single raise, I just bid game. And that seems to be the way the previous posters are going (some even hint at SLAM!).

I am not as confident about game. This is a very poor 5 loser hand. If a good portion of partner's values are in clubs, you may find game to be quite poor. Conceivably, you could be off 3 diamond tricks before you gain the lead.

This is especially true playing Bergen, where the single raise promises 3 and only 3 trump (unless partner is 4333).

While I would probably just blast out game at the table, if I was going to make a game try it would be 3♦. I want partner to know that I require diamond values more than anything else (yes, the ♥K would be nice) in evaluating game prospects.

If I had it in my quiver, a short suit try in clubs would be a good way to get to a making game.

[ggwhiz]

ArtK78, on Jan 20 2009, 01:36 PM, said:

if I was going to make a game try it would be 3♦.

I agree with the game try of 3♦ and admit that we can't get to 4♥ from there if it's right but......

1. Allows partner a chance to put the brakes on if need be.

I play that 3♥ by pard after this would show a lukewarm ♦ holding(doubleton?), ♥ values and still interested. Not likely to happen with us holding the ♥AQ though.

2. Might be best to elicit a favorable opening lead, anything but a ♦.

If pard has modest values and they are in the club suit, 3♠ might be plenty.

[mike777]

Hanoi5, on Jan 20 2009, 11:34 AM, said:

The opponents think last board was not good for them but you somehow doubt it. This time you get your hand from the board, count your cards and find this nice hand:

♠AJ8xx
♥AQ92
♦Qxx
♣A

You open 1♠, 2♠ from partner and you...

(You play 2/1, Bergen raises, long-suit tries/It's MP's and no one's vulnerable)

4s game try.

[whereagles]

It's one of those hands where a trial bid is just a way to talk yourself out of a cold game that the field is bidding.

But I would still make the unlucky expert bid of 3♦.

[Codo]

I play Long suit, so I bid 3 ♣. I want to play in game anyway and maybe this LSTB will make it more difficult for them to defend.

[skjaeran]

I just bid 4♠. I don't like to give away anything when I "know" what to play.