[Cascade]

1♥ (3♦) 3NT (PASS)
4♠ (PASS) 5♥ (PASS)
5♠ (PASS) 5NT (PASS)
6♥ (PASS) PASS (DBl*)
All PASS

5♠ was key-card for hearts and 5NT showed 0 or 3.

What do you think is suggested by a question specifically about the 3NT bid made immediately before the double of 6♥ ?

[bluejak]

Nothing much.

[movingon]

It might suggest a diamond lead.
and if I were leader I would only lead a diamond if there was no doubt that this is the lead I would have made without the question.

[bluejak]

Why does it suggest a diamond lead?

[TimG]

I think a question about 3N suggests an interest in responder's diamond holding. But, I don't think that necessarily suggests a diamond (or non-diamond) lead.

[FrancesHinden]

Depends on the answer.

On the basis that double usually asks for 'dummy's first bid suit', then if 3NT showed a good hand with clubs (e.g. x = spades, 3S = please bid 3NT, 3NT = clubs etc) a double would now suggest a club lead. So if the doubler actually wants a spade lead, he has to ask about 3NT to check he's not asking for a different suit.

But in general I would agree with 'nothing much'.

[movingon]

Since there was no alert, the assumption is that the 3nt bidder has diamonds covered and there is a willingness to play 3nt.

[OleBerg]

I am far from confident that I am right, but couldn't it suggest, that the double is indeed lead-directing.

If no alert is made, then the thing South might want to know, is how strong 3NT is. If it is explained as relatively strong, it indicates that the double is not based on "power", thus lead-directing.

But one hell of strange question to ask.

[peachy]

Cascade, on Aug 5 2009, 07:41 AM, said:

1♥ (3♦) 3NT (PASS)
4♠ (PASS) 5♥ (PASS)
5♠ (PASS) 5NT (PASS)
6♥ (PASS) PASS (DBl*)
All PASS

5♠ was key-card for hearts and 5NT showed 0 or 3.

What do you think is suggested by a question specifically about the 3NT bid made immediately before the double of 6♥ ?

It was a poorly timed and poorly asked question. The question of ONLY about the 3NT bid [I assume the answer was *diam stopped, enough for game* ?] and AT THAT TIME =just before doubling, to me would mean that the suit he wants led is diamonds and that dummy will not have diamonds stopped afterall. To me, it was an illegal attempt to direct the lead (diamonds) through the untimely question, without actually naming the suit.

I formed this opinion in a flash before reading other responses. After reading David's and other responses, I am surprised that the consesus seems to be it means nothing or nothing much. If it is "nothing much", what is the "something" that differentiates "nothing much" from "nothing"?

Please don't use a artillery, but I would like to hear reasons why my view might be wrong.

[jjbrr]

My first impression was it was hinting at a ♦ lead also. Asking about 3N makes everyone conscious of the ♦ suit.

[Cascade]

Supplementary question:

Is doubling Lighter?

Does double in itself (without the question) ask for a diamond lead? or ask for some other lead?

[aguahombre]

In the absense of an alert, why was the question asked? Defending side has remedies if 3NT was not natural, and if known would have resulted in different auction or defense. A double, without asking, would assume a natural 3NT. The question created UI when followed by a double.

[bluejak]

Yes, of course the question created UI. But that is why it is asked, what does the UI suggest?

I cannot see it suggesting anything much. Peachy's logic escapes me: I cannot see why double says "lead a diamond" if he has asked and not "lead a diamond" if he has not. As far as I am concerned, double says "pick a surprising lead given the auction" and I still cannot see how the question about 3NT affects it. Perhaps he wants a spade lead: he certainly will not get a spade lead if he does not double.

[OleBerg]

Cascade, on Aug 6 2009, 02:42 AM, said:

Supplementary question:

Is doubling Lighter?

Does double in itself (without the question) ask for a diamond lead? or ask for some other lead?

Double is Lightner in my book. (But then again, double is always lead-directing in my book.)

This makes me wonder if the scenario could be this:

The experienced South asked about 3NT, to be sure his less experienced in north would know it showed a stopper, and that the double didn't show there was two cashing diamonds.

Thus I am a little more confident, that the question suggests the double is indeed lead-directing.

[bluejak]

Oh, well, if my partner doubles a slam in an auction that was not competitive to a high level, I am confident it is Lightner 100% of the time. The UI is completely irrelevant to that.

[movingon]

or the doubler asked because he has good diamonds and couldn't quite believe the 3nt bid was a solid bid.

In other words, he wanted a diamond lead.

[MFA]

Nothing much.

[cherdanno]

bluejak, on Aug 6 2009, 06:26 AM, said:

Oh, well, if my partner doubles a slam in an auction that was not competitive to a high level, I am confident it is Lightner 100% of the time. The UI is completely irrelevant to that.

On this auction, I wouldn't be so sure - it is not hard to see opener overbidding here with responder having a light 3NT bid based on a long club suit that is completely useless opposite opener's majors two-suiter. Maybe there are in a 7-2 fit where partner has KQTx of hearts. Or partner has 5 hearts.