[Echognome]

Agree with the previous bidding.

Partner is 2=1=4=6 or 3=0=4=6 without good spades. Something like xx x AJxx AKJ9xx would be typical. 3NT just seems like it'd be too difficult. It's possible partner has instead Qx x AJxx AJxxxx but then I'm really hoping for no wastage in clubs and I still will have a hard time setting up a suit (probably need ♥s 3-3). I think from the sounds of it that our best game is going to be 5♦, so I'm just going to bid that now.

[pclayton]

No I'm not 3Ning - I'll 4♦. I had a similar type hand last week, and 3N was a problem but 5♦ was cold. I expect a 3=0=4=6 or similar - maybe a 2=1=4=6 - so 4♥ may be a good spot too.

[mikeh]

Not 3N..... this looks like an instructive hand for those who run to notrump in the face of a misfit... it is rarely the best spot.

I am seduced into 4♥ by possession of the 9.. I would bid 4♦ with only AK10xxx. I will probably hate this if partner is void.. but even then, I may be able to elope with 10 tricks by ruffing clubs.. although entries may be a problem.

And, if he has a stiff, then 4♥ is probably better than 5♦.

Admittedly, a bid of 4♦ doesn't bar him from 4♥ on a stiff...... so I it is possible that I am masterminding here.

[nige1]

Jlall, on Jun 20 2008, 01:22 PM, said:

imps w/w partner dealer: Kxx AKT9xx Q8xx ---
1C p 1H p
2C p 2D* p
3D p 3H p
3S p ?
2D artificial GF.
Do you agree with your previous bidding? What do you bid now?

• Be serious! How can anyone fault Justin's bidding?
  
• Now I agree 4♦ = 10, 5♦ = 7, 4♥ = 6, 3N = 5.
  4♦ offers a choice of red suit games.

[gnasher]

My initial reaction was to bid 5♦, but the other comments have persuaded me to bid 4♦, in case partner bids 4♥ with a stiff honour.

This seems a well controlled auction so far.

[Echognome]

gnasher, on Jun 20 2008, 04:07 PM, said:

My initial reaction was to bid 5♦, but the other comments have persuaded me to bid 4♦, in case partner bids 4♥ with a stiff honour.

This seems a well controlled auction so far.

Yeah. I'm feeling 4♦ if interpreted correctly (and why shouldn't it be?) is better. At least I'm with the Or Not? crowd.

[Apollo81]

Ill go 4♦ too

[gnasher]

Given the lead, diamonds are probably 3-2.

The two lines I'd consider are:

(1) Cash dummy's top trumps, ace of hearts, heart ruff, spade to hand, heart ruff. That fails when RHO has two hearts and three diamonds. Its chances of success are roughly:

Hearts 3=3: 36%
Hearts 2=4: 24%
Hearts 4=2, diamonds 3=2: about 10% ?

(2) Take two ruffing finesses in clubs:

Clubs 4-3 with at least one honour onside: 3/4 x 62 = 46.5
Clubs 5=2 with at least one honour onside: 2/7 + 5/7 x 2/6 x 30 / 2 ~= 8%
about 8% I think

So, playing on hearts seems better.

I'm not sure what I'd have done at the table, except that I'm sure it wouldn't have involved the above calculations.