First board of the match we held
By way of explanation:
Our partnership agreement is not to stretch on the first board: being aggressive is fine, but not stretching. (That might be semantics for some but the distinction is meaningful for us.)
2♠ was NF and did not promise 6; a NS, 2N or 3♠ would have been GF
3♣ 2N instead here would have been INV but NF; 3N would have been NF but promises S tolerance (doubleton or stiff honour) so O(pener) knows when to remove when holding a six-card suit
3♠ All actions here would be GF: 3♦ would usually be three-card support, could be Hx at a pinch; 3♥ would be asking for a stopper (partner would bid 3♣ with a hand like x KJT AQJxx Qxxx as 3N would promise better S); 4♠ would show 6 or 7 good spades (a picture jump: 3♠ then 4♠ would show weaker S); 4♥ would be a SPL (over this partner's 4♠ would be a cue, not an offer to play); 4♣ would be a hand strong enough to make 5♣ -- weaker hands would bid 3♥ then pass 4♣, while a direct 5♣ suggests minimum with good clubs, often 5 (4♠ over a direct 4♣ is an offer to play, not a cue)
P (over 3N) 4♣ here was undiscussed but would show 6S and 4C: in related auctions we have bid like this with shapely hands with minimum high-card values so partner might take this as NF.
The partnership agreement is that when choosing between equally suitable or equally flawed calls (such as O's call over 3♣) choose the cheapest.
We know the hand would be easier using other methods. But should we have done better given what we were playing?
Thanks
David