[JLOGIC]

bluecalm, on 2012-September-26, 09:39, said:

I bid 1N and it was winning action as even 2H was already down and it was +180 for us. Partner had 9x ATx K98x KQJx. I now wonder if 2N is better than 1N though; maybe QJ9x of spades would make it so?
I don't like the idea of forcing the bidding to what is often 7 trump 3 level partial with wasted values in spades ; I think we're often going down there on hands where there is easy 90/120 available; seems like clear mistake to me but none of my friends agree with me on this one.

2N is foreign to me, but I and my partners are all on the super aggressive side of the scale when it comes to making white takeout doubles, so no doubt years of this has significantly impacted my judgement. It still feels wrong to me, we have no spot cards other than the ten of diamonds which is in our doubleton. Your idea about the 9 of spades is getting closer, but I'd still want more.

If game trying I like 2N a lot more than anything else

[jogs]

aguahombre, on 2012-September-26, 18:12, said:

Thinking wrong there. It is not the heart count that is particularly relevant. It is doubler's likely spade count (two on the auction) and the orientation of the advancer's hand. Looks like it belongs in NT if we play it, and the 1NT advance shows about 8-10. That is not a double-dummy evaluation.

When doubler has only one spade, it increases the chances of opponents competing with 2♠.

Both heart and spade length matter. Estimating tricks is multi-way ANOVA. You are on to something in that when doubler has two spades, it is much less likely that we can make over one more trick in hearts than notrumps.

[Fluffy]

QJxx is very good for NT, so for me the decision is close between 1NT and 2NT. I think my partners make more agressive take out doubles after I am a passed hand so 1NT would be my choice, if I was unpassed it would be very close, but depends on who is partner.