[FrancesHinden]

You hold

♠-
♥Q1093
♦AKQJ63
♣K63

Red at aggregate (think of it as imps if you aren't used to playing aggregate)

Partner opens 3S in SECOND SEAT, VUL AGAINST NOT, the next hand passes.

Your style if probably best described as "modern conservative" in this position, so partner will have a good 7-card spade suit, possibly a very bad 8-card suit.

[cherdano]

I would pass, I am surprised you think this is a close decision.

[pooltuna]

cherdano, on 2011-January-09, 05:39, said:

I would pass, I am surprised you think this is a close decision.

Actually I am surprised you think it is not. Vul vs not at IMPS do you regularly risk going down 3 or 4 with your preempts?

IMO any of pass, 3NT, or 4♠ could be right. I would guess 3NT, 4♠, and pass in that order.

[whereagles]

I can't tell whether I might have a game or not, so I'll just bid one. 4♠ for me.

[Phil]

pooltuna, on 2011-January-09, 06:43, said:

Actually I am surprised you think it is not. Vul vs not at IMPS do you regularly risk going down 3 or 4 with your preempts?

IMO any of pass, 3NT, or 4♠ could be right. I would guess 3NT, 4♠, and pass in that order.

Perhaps you should lay out some likely hands for partner instead of adding partner's tricks to ours to see if game is any good.

I'm not saying what I would do, but I doubt someone like Frances is posting a hand where a game decision is as simple as adding eight and two.

[Fluffy]

I count 2 spade losers and 2 aces, even 2 hearts and 1 club, will need a very good hand from aprtner to make 4♠

3NT only has 6 tricks, oppnents have to missdefend a lot to let it make.

[nigel_k]

Pass.

Maybe partner has one loser spades, a stiff heart or the king, and we can avoid losing a second club. But surely most times one of those will not happen. And it doesn't seem like the type of hand where they will lead a passive diamond or misdefend.

[JLOGIC]

I agree with cherdano, I'd pass. Even KQJxxxx Kxx x xx is not a very good game. And AKJTxxx xxx x xx is certainly a possibility.

I guess maybe the point is that some hands 3 is bad on a non diamond lead, and 4 is good on a diamond lead? Still not enough to get me to consider bidding here.

[nige1]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-January-09, 05:36, said:

You hold ♠- ♥ Q1093 ♦ AKQJ63 ♣ K63
Red at aggregate (think of it as imps if you aren't used to playing aggregate)
Partner opens 3S in SECOND SEAT, VUL AGAINST NOT, the next hand passes.
Your style if probably best described as "modern conservative" in this position, so partner will have a good 7-card spade suit, possibly a very bad 8-card suit.

IMO _P = 10, 3N = 7, 4♠ = 6.
Even if partner has ♠AKQxxxx ♥ xx ♦ xx ♣ xx, game is dodgy.
The case for 3N is that defenders may not believe that a player of Frances' calibre would bid 3N with a ♠ void

[pooltuna]

Phil, on 2011-January-09, 11:32, said:

Perhaps you should lay out some likely hands for partner instead of adding partner's tricks to ours to see if game is any good.

I'm not saying what I would do, but I doubt someone like Frances is posting a hand where a game decision is as simple as adding eight and two.

yet first choice I suggested 3NT which is normally suicidal with a void in partner's suit?

[mfa1010]

Pass. I think this is going with the odds.

[Siegmund]

Very close decision between pass and 4S. You have the tricks for it. You'd be happier if your diamonds were shorter (=possible void opposite).

If partner really is classical, I go.

[mtvesuvius]

Well, on constructions where partner has 2 or 3♥, game won't be too good. Partner rates to have a good suit, and I think is odds-on to have at least 2♥. I think that 4♠ could certainly make, but I will pass this hand.

[Rossoneri]

My (relatively short) experience says pass.

[tolvyrj]

Quick pass, so LHO has no time to think his next move, and may do something stupid or very stupid. 3Nt is... idont know what it is, but its certainly not bridge; if prd has running spades he has no side entry or if he has a side entry his spades will not run. Well of course he can have both, but then his opening is not correct. 4S...if im in a situation i have to try something, then yes, but i think its not odds. Pass, and an ethical quick one.

[awm]

I don't think 3NT is very likely to make. We will have transportation issues and most of partner's values will be in spades.

We could make 4♠. Typically if partner has short hearts, then 4♠ will be good but not cold. For example, give partner ♠AKJTxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣xx and 4♠ is basically on a club finesse (with a few extra chances on a non-club lead, but a few chances to go down with club ace onside on bad breaks). If partner has short diamonds, game will often have no play at all. Of course, this is somewhat effected (at IMP scoring) by the fact that if partner has short diamonds, 3♠ will fail pretty often. So we're only losing 3 IMPs when partner has short diamonds, whereas we will occasionally win a lot more when partner has short hearts. Nonetheless, the fact that game is often 50% (rather than cold) when partner has short hearts seems to reduce the odds.

I'd pass, but certainly we could have a game here. I think ♥K instead of ♥Q or ♣A instead of ♣K would be enough for me to raise, but I'm just too short on controls in the actual hand.

[FrancesHinden]

Well, I was the 3S opening hand and my partner didn't think it was obvious. At the table he passed, and the auction was identical in the other room, for a flat board in +140.
You are making 3NT (just) or 5D (more easily). Our teammates said they thought it was right to bid, but it's possible they were influenced by results.

The 3S opening has
AQ1098xx
x
109x
QJ

[JLOGIC]

I play partner for a stiff heart and 3 diamonds, and hell why not 2 fitting club honors to seal up those losers, and bid 5D ldo.