[ArcLight]

Unfavorable, IMPS
pass - pass - what do you open (2♣, 2NT, other)
holding:

S: A T
H: A x x
D: K 9 x
C: A K Q J 9

=================================

For a different hand, how do you respond to pards first seat 2NT bid with:

S: x x x x
H: Q J x x
D: J x x x x
C: void

3♣, Stayman? (we don't use Puppet Stayman)
What do you do over pards 3♦ response?

[blackshoe]

1. 2NT
2. 3 ♣, Romex Stayman.
2a. If I'm playing simple Stayman, then over 3♦ I bid 3NT and pray. The alternative is to bid 4♦, but if partner has the hand in 1, or many similar hands, we're gonna end up in the wrong contract.

[kenrexford]

I'd open the first 2♣, but I'm not sure what ranges you play. I use 19+ to 21, so this seems a tad rich for the 2NT opening.

On the second, playing straight Stayman, the response of 3♦ is just as good as a major call, if you pass.

[manudude03]

2NT-3C-3D-3NT for me and 2nd hand hoping it makes.

misread previous post- sorry.

[pclayton]

1. 2♣. Too good for 2N, even though the ♦J is probably wasted.

2. 3♣. Just regular stayman. I don't get the problem here.

[jdonn]

I don't get the problem on either hand. If 2NT is 20-21 on the first and you don't think this hand is too good, you need to sign up for point counters anonymous fast and start attending help group meetings. On the second you bid stayman then 3NT if you don't find a fit. Why would you not play for game on the same level when you don't even have assurance 3♦ is a better contract?

[blackshoe]

I agree, Josh, that if the range of 2NT is 20-21, that first hand is too strong. I play it as 21-22, though, and imo this hand fits.

[awm]

On the first hand I would bid 2♣...2NT for sure.

On the second hand, I don't see a real problem with 3♣ stayman followed by passing a 3♦ bid by partner. You have 24-25 hcp very unevenly divided with responder holding a queen and two jacks. There is no major suit fit. Why should we be making game on this hand? Given that partner has no 4cM, the odds of a 5-3 or better diamond fit are pretty good (any shape except 3-3-2-5 precisely or some shapes with a 6-card club suit that might not open 2NT). And another point is that those shapes where you have only seven diamonds between you (where 3♦ might not be so great) are also hands where your odds of making 3NT are truly awful (best shot at making 3NT is setting up diamonds when opener has 3-4 of them).

[jdonn]

blackshoe, on Jun 15 2008, 11:57 AM, said:

I agree, Josh, that if the range of 2NT is 20-21, that first hand is too strong. I play it as 21-22, though, and imo this hand fits.

Yes that's fine. I do believe 20-21 is considered the standard range since it's certainly the range used in conjunction with 15-17 for 1NT. I guess it wouldn't have hurt to state it though.

[ArcLight]

For problem 2 - the problem is :

Do you pass the 3♦ response, or bid game.

[han]

I would open 1C on the first one, precision.

More seriously, such an answer is of course useless. I agree that the hand is too strong for a 20-21 2NT opening.

On the second hand I'm glad to see that I don't agree with Josh's argument. 3D is much more likely a make than 3NT, even if we are not 100% guaranteed to have a fit. I would still bid 3NT though because 3D is not a game.

[jdonn]

han, on Jun 15 2008, 01:00 PM, said:

On the second hand I'm glad to see that I don't agree with Josh's argument. 3D is much more likely a make than 3NT, even if we are not 100% guaranteed to have a fit. I would still bid 3NT though because 3D is not a game.

In what way does that disagree with my argument? I agree 3♦ is more likely to make than 3NT. I said there is no assurance it's a better contract so we might as well play for game on the same level. Glad to see we completely agree.

[rogerclee]

Agree with han and jdonn.

[CSGibson]

problem 1: upgrading to 2 clubs and then 2N.

Problem 2: We are vul at imps. 3N. If other conditions (NV or MP) applied, I would pass.

[kenrexford]

So what if 3NT is game and 3♦ is not. You have almost no chance in Hell oif making 3NT, but you have a lot going for 3♦.

Gove partner some ridiculously tremendous hand like Axx-AKx-AQxx-Axx, and he'd open 2♣, and that still takes a diamond hook. Move the diamond Queen to clubs and you have a better shot, but Geez!

It seems to me that over 10 hands, 3NT with the positives and negatives summed will be less than 3♦ with the positives and negatives summed.

I mean, do you convert all 3M bids to 3NT just because 3NT is game?

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Jun 15 2008, 02:17 PM, said:

So what if 3NT is game and 3♦ is not. You have almost no chance in Hell oif making 3NT, but you have a lot going for 3♦.

Gove partner some ridiculously tremendous hand like Axx-AKx-AQxx-Axx, and he'd open 2♣, and that still takes a diamond hook. Move the diamond Queen to clubs and you have a better shot, but Geez!

It seems to me that over 10 hands, 3NT with the positives and negatives summed will be less than 3♦ with the positives and negatives summed.

I mean, do you convert all 3M bids to 3NT just because 3NT is game?

You SEVERELY underestimate the chances of 3NT making. There isn't much else to say about it.

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Jun 15 2008, 11:53 AM, said:

I don't get the problem on either hand. If 2NT is 20-21 on the first and you don't think this hand is too good, you need to sign up for point counters anonymous fast and start attending help group meetings. On the second you bid stayman then 3NT if you don't find a fit. Why would you not play for game on the same level when you don't even have assurance 3♦ is a better contract?

agree

[andy_h]

2c-2nt
and stayman-3nt