[ahydra]

IMPs, both vul

---

1NT = 12-14, 2S = natural (playing Landy). No discussion about how forcing 3H is. The opponents found the obvious diamond lead to sink 3NT, while 4H is fairly easy. Any suggestions for how NS could have done better here?

Thanks,

ahydra

[etha]

I would have bid the same way I think.

[billyjef]

ahydra, on 2019-June-22, 01:18, said:

IMPs, both vul

---

1NT = 12-14, 2S = natural (playing Landy). No discussion about how forcing 3H is. The opponents found the obvious diamond lead to sink 3NT, while 4H is fairly easy. Any suggestions for how NS could have done better here?

Thanks,

ahydra

Not having an agreement about the advance by partner limits the ability to ATB. I assume 2NT would have been the most forward going advance? Thus 3H could be just trying to improve the contract. That said, I'd think such a bid would deny tolerance for spades, which looks to have as much playability as hearts. I'd not have bid 3NT under these circumstances expecting partner to have 6 hearts, and lacking tolerance for spades and no interest in game.

Your hand, is just short of doubling first with about 5 playing tricks if played in a black suits. The further question becomes, what would we do with your hand in the auction, (1N) - 2♠-(P)-2N; (P)-3♣-(P)-3♥? I'd still not bid 3N, especially now that there would be no doubt which minor to lead. Knowing we have game, I'd bid 4 clubs I think.

[billyjef]

billyjef, on 2019-June-22, 08:37, said:

Not having an agreement about the advance by partner limits the ability to ABT. I assume 2NT would have been the most forward going advance? Thus 3H could be just trying to improve the contract. That said, I'd think such a bid would deny tolerance for spades, which looks to have as much playability as hearts. I'd not have bid 3NT under these circumstances expecting partner to have 6 hearts, and lacking tolerance for spades and no interest in game.

Your hand, is just short of doubling first with about 5 playing tricks if played in a black suit. The further question becomes, what would we do with your hand in the auction, (1N) - 2♠-(P)-2N; (P)-3♣-(P)-3♥? I'd still not bid 3N, especially now that there would be no doubt which minor to lead. Knowing we have game, I'd bid 4 clubs I think.

Game probable, double dummy, in ♠, ♥, and ♣. 5 Clubs has good chance to make on Diamond lead; win the diamond ace, ♠ ace, finesse to the Jack, throw diamond off 3rd winning spade. Hopefully losing no more than the ♥ ace and a ♣.

[gszes]

partner couldn't rebid spades so poor chance of running spade suit and if hearts cannot run immediately 3n could have serious problems. With the good heart spots and 6 bagger I think 4h is a more obvious choice than 3n.

[Cyberyeti]

billyjef, on 2019-June-22, 08:58, said:

Game probable, double dummy, in ♠, ♥, and ♣. 5 Clubs has good chance to make on Diamond lead; win the diamond ace, ♠ ace, finesse to the Jack, throw diamond off 3rd winning spade. Hopefully losing no more than the ♥ ace and a ♣.

Wrong line but right idea (Imagine opener with ♠Qxxx, ♣Kxx with E ruffing the third spade), 2 rounds of trumps then 3 spades to ditch the diamond and a spade ruff to then claim.

[billyjef]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-June-23, 03:05, said:

Wrong line but right idea (Imagine opener with ♠Qxxx, ♣Kxx with E ruffing the third spade), 2 rounds of trumps then 3 spades to ditch the diamond and a spade ruff to then claim.

You're right, trumps trick 2. Thanks.

[rmnka447]

I don't see how North can bid 3 NT without a ♦ stop, especially with the advance to 3 ♥ over 2 ♠ undiscussed.

3 NT, in essence, assumes that South has ♦ stoppers which North has no way of knowing. That's putting cards into partner's hand which is not good bidding.

I'm not sure I'd get to game on this hand, although double dummy game looks reasonable. Such is the fog created by weak NTs.

3 ♥ ought to show a reasonably good hand with good ♥ because of bidding ♥ at the 3 level. But I'm not sure North can move with pretty much a black hand opposite.