[jhsh]

♠ AQT86
♥ KQJ7
♦ T5
♣ K3

♠ J7
♥ A84
♦ A74
♣ Q8754

3NT is the final contract at most table. The bidding may like this:

1♠-2♣
2♥-2NT
3NT-pass

Is there a rational approach to reach 4♠? Thanks!

[Cascade]

 jhsh, on 2011-February-20, 20:11, said:

♠ AQT86
♥ KQJ7
♦ T5
♣ K3

♠ J7
♥ A84
♦ A74
♣ Q8754

3NT is the final contract at most table. The bidding may like this:

1♠-2♣
2♥-2NT
3NT-pass

Is there a rational approach to reach 4♠? Thanks!

After

1♠ 2♣
2♥ 2♠ ...

you might get there.

2♠ seems at least as good as 2NT with ♦ Axx to me.

[jhsh]

 Cascade, on 2011-February-20, 20:20, said:

After

1♠ 2♣
2♥ 2♠ ...

you might get there.

2♠ seems at least as good as 2NT with ♦ Axx to me.

Thanks Cascade. No doubt 2♠ is a good start. My main concern is exaggerating a little about the length and quality of spades may cause problem latter on.

[dake50]

I actually end in 4H by 3H raise.
Hope 1xS-ruff establishes spades.
These are terrible minor stops opposite a major 2-suiter.

[jhsh]

 dake50, on 2011-February-20, 20:44, said:

I actually end in 4H by 3H raise.
Hope 1xS-ruff establishes spades.
These are terrible minor stops opposite a major 2-suiter.

Agree. Although the chance of 4♥ is not as good as 4♠ for you may risk losing trump control.

[gszes]

I assume from the bidding we are playing sayc so I offer the following


1s 2c
2h 2n
3c 3d
3s 4s

correcting 2n to 3c (to play) is a terribly tiny target
so opener should not bid 3c with some total minimum
with 5413

KJxxx
KJxx
x
KJx

1. there is no 100% guarantee that responder has 5+ clubs
2. game looks out of reach stop bidding since 2n might be last viable spot

once we conclude opener cant be minimum 5413 opener needs either extra values
and/or extra distribution to bid beyond 2n.

in our case opener has a fair amount of extra values but no extra distribution
but still some concern about nt vs spades.

the 3c bid is mainly asking responder to make sure 3n is best place to play

3d shows dia ace and no other dia stop
(opener can now bid 3s to ask about honor x in spades with 3n denying)
3h some other dia stop and honor xx in hearts
(opener can now bid 3s to ask about honor x in spades with 3n denying)
3s some other dia stop and honor x in spades
3n does not fit 3d 3h 3s bids and cant go beyond 3n.



opener should be well placed to make a final decision on where to play.
Opener should not be looking for places to play other than nt unless they
have viable alternatives. Here the spade suit is good enough to offer a
viable alternative to 3n and thus justifies the 3c bid.

[Fluffy]

I would play 3NT for sure and not worry much for this deal.

[jhsh]

 gszes, on 2011-February-21, 09:28, said:

I assume from the bidding we are playing sayc so I offer the following


1s 2c
2h 2n
3c 3d
3s 4s

3♣ is a very insightful treatmenet of this problem, thanks gszes!

[jhsh]

 Fluffy, on 2011-February-21, 12:19, said:

I would play 3NT for sure and not worry much for this deal.

That's true. I just feel a little uncomfortable, particularly when you know another game is there and the majority didn't find it.

[gnasher]

I think 1♠-2♣;2♥-2NT;3♣ should show a more suit-oriented hand than this. I'd be more convinced by a sequence starting 1♠-2♣;2♥-2♠;3♣ - after the 2♠ preference, it's more obvious for opener to bid 3♣.

Also, I don't see why ...-2NT;3♣-3♦ shows specifically the ace. Surely it just shows doubt about strain and no great concentration in a major?

[phil_20686]

Eh, I am more than a little suprised by the posts here; I would have over bid the south hand, but then my partner and I do not open light, so maybe 1s-2c-2h-3d-3s-4s lookd pretty good. If your partner opens light then would bid 2S not 2N, this hand doesnt look right at all for 3N IMO, when partner bids 2N over this (which should be GF now IMO, looking for the best strain, I would offer 3S and get to 4S, something like 1s-2c-2h-2s-2n-3s-4s, or responder might just give it 4S, he has great cards for spades and bad cards for 3N, but then partner could have a good hand for 3N so I think 3S is enough provided it is forcing.

Having 1s-2c-2h-2s-2n as "invitation" seems pretty pointless to me, since you should have 12+10, pretty much any extras are enough for game and the a 3 level sign off probably isnt very safe anyway in a very likely 5-2 fit.