[pclayton]

1. Matchpoints, unit (large club) game. ♠AJT, ♥6x, ♦AQxx, ♣KJxx. 1♥ on your right (dealer). You double, pass on left, 1N by pard, pass. Do you boost or not?

2. Same event. Well know player on your right playing with his wife. ♠A, ♥AQ7xx, ♦xx, ♣K9xxx. You are white and the opps are red.

Pard opens 1♦, 1♥ by you and LHO doubles. Pard bids 2♦ (tending to deny 3 hearts). and RHO bids 2♠. Now what?

[gwnn]

1: conservative 2NT, assuming this 1NT is (8)9-11. Pushy 2NT assuming it's 6-10.
2: lebensohl 2NT should apply here (what else could it be?), so 3♣ to GF.

[mike777]

2) I agree that 3clubs is extra, given good/bad 2nt. But is it really one round forcing or even game forcing?

[mikeh]

1. I pass. Pluses are nice, and I really don't have a source of tricks: I view invitations as asking partner to accept unless he has a minimum, rather than to reject unless he has a maximum. On this hand, I'd like to change my approach, but....

2. 3♣. No reason, as far as I can see, for assuming lebensohl applies and indeed I'd prefer to have a natural bid here. And a change of suit is a one-round force, I think. So 3♣ it is, but of course I ain't telling what I bid over 3♦....please don't ask....ok, I confess; 3♠.... buck passing

[HeartA]

Jlall, on Mar 5 2007, 05:36 PM, said:

1) Yes I'd raise to 2N, but my idea of a 1N bid is probably a bit sounder than most (good 7(if stuck) to average 11). My cards are well placed, yada yada.

2) 3C natural and forcing, no problem yet.

same as Justin, 2N and 3C. wtp?

[awm]

I'm with mikeh on this one. It's never made much sense to me why, if double shows an opening hand, 1NT should be so much sounder than opposite an opening bid. Yes occasionally you are stuck and have to bid a 3-card suit in response to a double, but I see no reason to extend this "problem" hand type by requiring 1NT to show a good 7 instead of something more like 5. Sure, on a good day partner has a dead max 10-count and we miss a game, but it's MPs and much more often the 2NT raise gets us to 2NT on 21-22 high.

Agree that 3♣ should be forcing on the second.

[mike777]

"♣. No reason, as far as I can see, for assuming lebensohl applies and indeed I'd prefer to have a natural bid here. And a change of suit is a one-round force, I think. So 3♣ it is, but of course I ain't telling what I bid over 3♦....please don't ask....ok, I confess; 3♠.... buck passing "


Why should 2nt be natural, do we really want to compete in NT on this type of auction? Again just asking.

[the hog]

1) Even though 1NT is constructive, about 8-10, I really don't have a source of tricks here. Pass as it is MPs. Definitely invite at Imps.
2) 3C forcing.

[cherdano]

mike777, on Mar 6 2007, 01:34 AM, said:

Why should 2nt be natural, do we really want to compete in NT on this type of auction? Again just asking.

There is a game bonus for making 3N. There is no game bonus for making 4♦. Other questions?

[paulg]

1. Pass. This is matchpoints and partner will bid 1NT with the slightest excuse. The vulnerability is not given but I suppose I might consider a raise at red (i.e., red vs white) but even then I'd pass.

2. 3♣ seems normal.

[Fluffy]

2NT because I see a source of tricks: endplay opener many times

3♣ on the second

[marcD]

easy pass on first one since partner would bid 2NT with 10 good points. guess it's a matter of agreement but we play 1NT 6-9, 2NT 10-11 bid game / cue bid if more

on second one 3C forcing

[Apollo81]

1. agree with mikeh (pass)

2. 3♣ wtp

[pclayton]

1. He held this hand and thought pass was clear at MPs. Well, he was right this time. Pard held: ♠Kxx, ♥Jxxx, ♦Kxx, ♣Qxx. Naturally, RHO led a low heart, and picked up the suit. I thought 2N was pretty obvious with these tenaces. Give me: Axx, xx, AKxx, Axxx and its a clear pass.

2. He bid 3♣ and got to a sketchy 3N. The entire hand:

---

They led a spade. He cleared diamonds. LHO pitched the ♣8, ♠x, and the ♥8 (oops). Making 4 after they shifted to a low (?) club and didn't cash out the suit.

When he gave me the hand, I thought double looked pretty juicy. I don't think even this declarer can get out for less than 500, and 800 looks likely.

[whereagles]

1. 2NT and I'm not afraid of going down if pard passes.
2. 3♣, followed by 4♦ if they go to 3♠.

[mike777]

cherdano, on Mar 6 2007, 03:29 AM, said:

mike777, on Mar 6 2007, 01:34 AM, said:

Why should 2nt be natural, do we really want to compete in NT on this type of auction? Again just asking.

There is a game bonus for making 3N. There is no game bonus for making 4♦. Other questions?

2) Is game really that likely? Are we not beating 2s x alot then? Seems wanting to compete with 2nt as good/bad is much, much more frequent.