[Cyberyeti]

kenberg, on 2016-August-25, 08:45, said:

I think 2D is very likely to end the auction. Partner hears this auction and thinks: I heard his 1NT, I told him that a club contract is likely to be better, presumably showing a shapely hand with hearts and clubs, and he now says he prefers 2D. I have no reason to overrule this choice, I pass.

Maybe 2D is a good contract, maybe not, but I think that it will be the contract if I bid 2D.

I will be interested in hearing what actually happened here. Maybe I am nuts but I think a 2D call will be passed on almost any holding that is consistent with the bidding so far.

This is my point and why you don't do it on the original hand

[miamijd]

kenberg, on 2016-August-25, 08:45, said:

I think 2D is very likely to end the auction. Partner hears this auction and thinks: I heard his 1NT, I told him that a club contract is likely to be better, presumably showing a shapely hand with hearts and clubs, and he now says he prefers 2D. I have no reason to overrule this choice, I pass.

Maybe 2D is a good contract, maybe not, but I think that it will be the contract if I bid 2D.

I will be interested in hearing what actually happened here. Maybe I am nuts but I think a 2D call will be passed on almost any holding that is consistent with the bidding so far.

I don't care for the 1NT bid on Round 1 at all. It's a decided underbid, and underbidding at your first turn very often leaves you badly placed later on. It's generally better to be slightly aggressive on your first call then to make a slight underbid, because it's easier to slow down the auction later than it is to catch up. Either 2D or 2NT on Round 1 is a better call; they leave you much better placed later on in the auction.

At this point, it's highly likely that partner has 1-2 diamonds. He has at least 5H, at least 4C, and very likely 2S (if LHO had 3-card support, he might have raised; if RHO had a decent hand with a six-bagger, he might have bid 2S at some point). Sure, he could be specifically 1534, but the odds are very much against it.

Having decided this hand wasn't worth a 2D or 2NT bid on Round 1, you shouldn't try to catch up now. Just pass and take your plus score. If your side doesn't have a game, you'll probably get a good result.

[zillahandp]

2d first time and then least problem , 1nt just causes issues.

[kenberg]

Perhaps I would have bid 2D on the first round. It's close, and I can't be sure. But I think saying 2D eliminates all problems is a step too far. Suppose it starts 1H-(1S)-2D-P. Partner is going to bid again, he must. Maybe 2H. Phil addresses this and says he then bids 2NT. Fair enough, but on this auction partner is far more likely to raise 2NT to 3NT than if I begin with 1MT over 1S and then rebid 2NT over 2C. Do I want to encourage this? I have a spade stop but after the spade lead I had also better have nine tricks on top. Maybe I do.

I am not quarreling with 2D, I might well have done it. But I don't think it is clear cut and I understand wank's reason for not choosing it.

[ggwhiz]

kenberg, on 2016-August-27, 06:28, said:

I am not quarreling with 2D, I might well have done it. But I don't think it is clear cut and I understand wank's reason for not choosing it.

Me too. 2♦ is unlimited and forcing as opposed to getting there via a limited 1nt first, flawed (I try to avoid the bid with a stiff) but economical.