[eagles123]

system (not my choice) is 2c stayman, 2d/2h transfer, 2s is transfer to clubs then 3d is to play, 2n is natural invite as is 3D

---

Thanks,

eagles

[gordontd]

When playing a strong NT I like to play 2C followed by 3m as invitational. That's what I'd do on this hand if I could. With your agreements I think I'd just bid 3D invitational.

[nullve]

I voted Stayman, then 3N over 2♦.

I'm prepared to look stupid.

[pescetom]

How is East's 1♣ opening described?

[eagles123]

sorry I should've added 1c is acol style

[gordontd]

nullve, on 2018-August-14, 08:07, said:

I voted Stayman, then 3N over 2♦.

I'm prepared to look stupid.

If I were prepared to go to game regardless, I'd do the same.

[mikeh]

I assume 1N is 15-18, but it would be useful for the OP to advise us of that. All too often problems are posted without information that one would have at the table. What does it cost to tell the reader all the relevant information? Why assume that 'everyone plays it the way I do', when anyone familiar with bridge sites knows that isn't true?

I'd use stayman. While partner probably doesn't have spades, if he does we absolutely want to play in 4S rather than 3N. If he has fewer than 4 hearts, the opps are likely to lead that suit, and we may not be able to set up diamonds in time to make 9 tricks. And a club lead, the other possibility, may result in our entry being forced out prematurely.

If he is 4-4 in the majors, then he probably has only 2 diamonds, and now we really are at risk for not bringing diamonds home, without which I don't like our chances in 3N.

Thus it behooves us to explore for spades.

When he lacks 4 spades, then there is more chance that he fits diamonds and/or that he has good enough hearts that they can't hurt him there. In fact, if he lacks spades, our hand is likely better for notrump than if he has spades.

So I am not afraid of pushing to what may be a relatively thin game. Normally mps is about plus scores and one does not want to push for thin games. Here, we have two ways to win by bidding stayman (we find spades or we reach a making 3N) and only one way to lose.

By contrast, inviting in diamonds is a one-dimensional action.

[DozyDom]

Call me lazy, but I'm not inviting. I'm at mps and I'll take my plus in 3D. Then again, perhaps my partners have less sound overcalls than some of you.

[ggwhiz]

On this bidding my club holding is a solid side entry with modest help in diamonds so 3♦ for me.

The 1nt bid instead of double and my stiff heart make a 4-4 spade fit unlikely and any making game should score well. The safest partscore should do ok too if partner passes.

[rmnka447]

There's no reason that partner can't possibly have a ♠ fit, so it's Stayman followed by 2 NT for me. Unfortunately, I usually play Stayman followed by 3 of a minor as forcing so that's out as a possible auction for me.

While 7 opposite 15-17(18) may seem a little light to invite, but remember partner's high cards sit behind the bulk of the opponent's high cards and are thus probably a little more valuable than the pure high card count number. And in this case, your 7 count is purely prime values instead of quacks.

[Winstonm]

The issue here is that fit is crucial to the value of this hand and we are guessing about spades. If partner has 4 solid spades, KQ10x or so, then a spade game might be best. At the same time, if partner has Qxxx, then we could easily lose 4 spades tricks if opp opened on 4423 or 4414 shape.

I think the idea here is that in this type auction, under-strength games often make because of being able to locate cards - so I think a try is in order - yet I don't want to be there without a good fit. The only suit in which I can emphasize the quality of the fit as important is in diamonds, so I will make my try there with 3D.

[eagles123]

mikeh, on 2018-August-14, 09:47, said:

I assume 1N is 15-18, but it would be useful for the OP to advise us of that. All too often problems are posted without information that one would have at the table. What does it cost to tell the reader all the relevant information? Why assume that 'everyone plays it the way I do', when anyone familiar with bridge sites knows that isn't true?

I'd use stayman. While partner probably doesn't have spades, if he does we absolutely want to play in 4S rather than 3N. If he has fewer than 4 hearts, the opps are likely to lead that suit, and we may not be able to set up diamonds in time to make 9 tricks. And a club lead, the other possibility, may result in our entry being forced out prematurely.

If he is 4-4 in the majors, then he probably has only 2 diamonds, and now we really are at risk for not bringing diamonds home, without which I don't like our chances in 3N.

Thus it behooves us to explore for spades.

When he lacks 4 spades, then there is more chance that he fits diamonds and/or that he has good enough hearts that they can't hurt him there. In fact, if he lacks spades, our hand is likely better for notrump than if he has spades.

So I am not afraid of pushing to what may be a relatively thin game. Normally mps is about plus scores and one does not want to push for thin games. Here, we have two ways to win by bidding stayman (we find spades or we reach a making 3N) and only one way to lose.

By contrast, inviting in diamonds is a one-dimensional action.

1N is 15-17.5

[akwoo]

rmnka447, on 2018-August-14, 11:08, said:

There's no reason that partner can't possibly have a ♠ fit, so it's Stayman followed by 2 NT for me. Unfortunately, I usually play Stayman followed by 3 of a minor as forcing so that's out as a possible auction for me.

While 7 opposite 15-17(18) may seem a little light to invite, but remember partner's high cards sit behind the bulk of the opponent's high cards and are thus probably a little more valuable than the pure high card count number. And in this case, your 7 count is purely prime values instead of quacks.

I think inviting on this hand is a bad idea, because what you want from partner for 3N are diamond honors, not points, and there is no way you can tell partner to decide based on diamond honors.

Give partner any 14 HCP hand including AQ of diamonds and you have a pretty good chance at 3N. Give partner any 17 HCP hand without a diamond honor and 3N is pretty hopeless.

Inviting with 2N is just asking partner to make a decision based on the wrong information, so you might as well either bid 3N or pass 2D. (Inviting with 3D is a different thing, because partner should know to evaluate their hand based on diamond honors in that case.)

[FelicityR]

Having looked at all the replies, I'm too in the 3♦ invitational camp, but any bid could be right here. And the contract could depend on the right lead or wrong lead, and many other things and that's stating the very obvious.

I think the subtle difference here is that the opponents are playing Acol, presumably with 4 card majors and usually minors too and a weak NT. That suggests but not guarantees that East is either 4414 with a singleton ♦ bidding Classical Acol - the suit below the singleton; or a 4315 shape or even shapelier. So when declarer has 3♦, with the right guess those ♦s are likely (but not guaranteed again) to come in.

What I don't like about the hand is that the only entry outside the ♦ suit is in the suit that the opponents have bid, so the opponents will probably lead it, especially if the defender knows partner's longest suit is ♣s [Compare that with 2/1/SAYC bidding where a prepared ♣ is used].

All in all a difficult decision, but it's right to give partner the opportunity to bid the vulnerable game.

[nekthen]

I am playing MP I think 1N will score better than 3♦, so I am passing. At imps I make an effort to find a game. If opps come back in I can bid my diamonds

[ahydra]

I think mikeh is right, gotta go for the Stayman. If you get back 2D you can play it safe(ish) with 2NT or take a punt at 3NT. I'd probably take the low road because the diamonds aren't all that great.

ahydra

[gordontd]

ahydra, on 2018-August-15, 05:38, said:

I think mikeh is right, gotta go for the Stayman. If you get back 2D you can play it safe(ish) with 2NT or take a punt at 3NT. I'd probably take the low road because the diamonds aren't all that great.

ahydra

If you were playing safe, you would be passing a 2D response to Stayman.

[ggwhiz]

gordontd, on 2018-August-15, 07:16, said:

If you were playing safe, you would be passing a 2D response to Stayman.

Speaking of playing safe, what about partners 2♥ response to stayman? 3♦ next is forcing for most people. 2nt is invitational and partners decision to go on or not will be based on the only knowledge of your hand as having some spades where you have zero help.

[miamijd]

I'd like this hand a lot better if we had another club. As is, the outside entry is subject to attack on opening lead if partner has the Qc instead of the King.

Still, it's likely that partner either has (A) four spades; (B) the Kc; © AQd or (D) Axx of diamonds and they split. Even something like:

Kxx
AQx
QX
KTxx

which is as awful as it gets, gives you a fighting chance at 3NT.

So I think I'd just bid 2C and then follow with 3NT over 2D/H.

Cheers,
Mike

[ahydra]

miamijd, on 2018-August-15, 09:52, said:

Kxx
AQx
QX
KTxx

which is as awful as it gets, gives you a fighting chance at 3NT.

Well, it gives you a chance to call the TD. (12 cards)

ahydra