[Phil]

♠AQxx ♥x ♦Tx ♣KJ97xx

Vul v NV

1♦ - (2♣) - P - (2♥)
3♦ - (p) - ?

As a side question what would you have bid if partner had passed 2♥?

[bluecalm]

I bid 3H now.
If partner passed I would have doubled: t/o to hearts.

[mikeh]

I agree with 3♥.

3N has to be in the picture, to the point that I'd bid it myself if I weren't allowed to try to get partner to do it.

3♥ has to imply a trap pass of 2♣ so it shouldn't imply any heart values. Partner shouldn't worry about spades..I have to hold more than just clubs. I'm hoping for something akin to xxx AJx AKQxxx x (or better) where the spade hook rates to work and now all we need are diamonds 3-2.

Had partner passed 2♥, I would have reopened with a nail-biting double. I don't see that as 'takeout'...I see it as revealing the trap pass and announcing ownership of the hand....partner will frequently pass, and the real issue is how good/long do his hearts have to be in order to justify that action? A10x probably won't be good enough on this hand:)

A stiff heart and no assured, or even probable, club tricks make for possibly uncomfortable defence, but otoh we might be scoring 300 or even 500....J10x AJ9x AKxxx x with the spade K in dummy....so passing out of fear seems wrong.

[MrAce]

I would bid 3♥ now.

If pd passed, i would still continue with a cue (3♣) rather than DBL at these colours. It is not pure T/O dbl for me as MikeH said, i am representing a trap pass hand. I would just prefer to play our game and not try to seek for adventure with a 2 level doubled contract when they are known to have 8-9 card fit.

[bluecalm]

I don't see why partner should pass a double without a solid trump stack.
I also don't understand playing a double as "just a trap pass". Imo if we have t/o hand to a suit they bid we double and if we have both of those suits we either pass or bid 2/3N.
Double as "just a trap pass, do something" seems like silly convention to me.

[MrAce]

bluecalm, on 2012-October-15, 13:29, said:

I don't see why partner should pass a double without a solid trump stack.
I also don't understand playing a double as "just a trap pass". Imo if we have t/o hand to a suit they bid we double and if we have both of those suits we either pass or bid 2/3N.
Double as "just a trap pass, do something" seems like silly convention to me.

I actually saw my hand as if i had 13 hcp. So if pd passes 2♥, double is better with this hand, we should not % 100 comitted to game. Sorry.

I thought for some reason we have enough to make game vulnerable and didn't wanna mess with 2♥ doubled at these colors.

But pretty much with everything else you said i disagree ( about dbl being just a take out )

[Fluffy]

When RHO doesn't support, partner will always stop hearts, 3♥ is better in theory, but 3NT might be betterin practice depending on partner.

[rsteele]

Reading all the post it is obvious that the "field" favors action but doesn't know what the final contract should be. I suggest that 3 Spades is a better solution than 3 hearts. It says I had a trap pass of clubs, I don't have hearts and I do have spades. A considerabled improvement over simply directing a no trump contract.

[PhilKing]

rsteele, on 2012-October-16, 11:45, said:

Reading all the post it is obvious that the "field" favors action but doesn't know what the final contract should be. I suggest that 3 Spades is a better solution than 3 hearts. It says I had a trap pass of clubs, I don't have hearts and I do have spades. A considerabled improvement over simply directing a no trump contract.

I am not sure it does. I think you could have a 6133/6124 approx six count, for instance.

[mikeh]

rsteele, on 2012-October-16, 11:45, said:

Reading all the post it is obvious that the "field" favors action but doesn't know what the final contract should be. I suggest that 3 Spades is a better solution than 3 hearts. It says I had a trap pass of clubs, I don't have hearts and I do have spades. A considerabled improvement over simply directing a no trump contract.

The only minor flaw in your argument is that you don't, in context, have spades!

Partner denied a 4 card spade suit (all 4=6 hands good enough to justify 3♦ will bid 2♠ instead)...thus logic dictates that when you suggest spades as trump, your spades play well opposite 3 card support, which may be true on many layouts, but on just about all such layouts 3N will be as good or better, while on other layouts, 4♠ is hopeless with 3N good.

[gszes]

mikeh, on 2012-October-16, 14:15, said:

Partner denied a 4 card spade suit (all 4=6 hands good enough to justify 3♦ will bid 2♠ instead

sorry for the partial quote but this is a telling argument against any tox and 3s being anything other than spades.

Over 3d I agree with 3h as revealing the trap pass and no heart stop (this is hugely important as our hand is more
than strong enough to consider 5d if p has no heart stop).

when p passes over 2h we have several options

2s spades not necessarily all that good but at least we have decent length and wish compete KT9xxx xx xx xxx.
2n reveals trap pass with hearts (and hopefully spades) stopped invite
3c clubs so good we wish to play there (rare) Ax xx xx QJT98xx or some such
3d reveals trap pass but have no values in spades/hearts.
3h reveals trap pass with spades stopped game forcing
3s decent spade suit and at least 7 cards KQTxxxx xx xx xx
3n reveals trap pass majors stopped to play.

X the big one reveals trap pass also has heart stuff and would like to defend if possible.

[Phil]

On general principles I thought a cue would show a stopper. Since it unlikely we have stoppers in both suits, 3N seemed to show the club stopper and ask for the heart. We landed in a good spot. Partner held x AKxxx AQxxxxx v and bid 4♥ over 3N and drove to slam over my 4♠ call. With the diamonds split there wasn't a lot to the play.

If partner passes, I cannot see doubling with both this hand and a similar hand with Hxx of hearts.

[Fluffy]

I don't see how to make slam with those cards.

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2012-October-17, 12:18, said:

I don't see how to make slam with those cards.

I see several paths to slam if diamonds are 2-2.

Bonus question: assume as the 2♣ bidder, you hold Kxx xx KJ AQxxxx. You lead the heart against slam, and declarer wins and ruffs a low heart at trick 2, ruffs a club and tables a small heart. Your play and why?

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on 2012-October-17, 12:33, said:

I see several paths to slam if diamonds are 2-2.

Bonus question: assume as the 2♣ bidder, you hold Kxx xx KJ AQxxxx. You lead the heart against slam, and declarer wins and ruffs a low heart at trick 2, ruffs a club and tables a small heart. Your play and why?

ruff with the king and score the jack later when declarer fineses, but anyway, this slam requires more than trumps breaking

[Phil]

Once diamonds are split you don't need a whole lot more than the spade finesse. Even then there are squeeze chances.

[PhilKing]

There's a squeeze exactly never. Slam requires overcaller to have two trumps and the spade king. That's it. And you will presumably play him for the trump king.

If West has ♦Kxx or Jxx and a stiff heart he can beat it on a trump.

[Phil]

PhilKing, on 2012-October-17, 17:46, said:

There's a squeeze exactly never.

Oh? If RHO has hand like Kxxx QJTxxx KJ x he can't break it up. Not a likely layout of course.

What's more interesting to me is if dummy had weaker clubs, we have a double if LHO happens to win the trump and play a 'natural' club instead of a spade. Note that we don't even need the spade Q.

[Fluffy]

slam also requires a non trump lead?

[kayin801]

3♥ like everyone else. Doesn't this deck seem like it has 60 points though? Either that or 2♥ can be real weak.