Reality Check

[Player]

I am just curious as to what your action would be on the following
hand.
Red vs Green Imps

Ax
Kxx
QJx
AQTxx

1NT (P) 2NT (P)
?
2NT is invit. The xs are very low
Ron

[PriorKnowledge]

3N even non-vul, but vul at IMPS makes it even more so.

[sbt]

In article
<4ed0a9b7-8c2c-4173...@s8g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>,

I would bid 3NT. Mid-range in HCP, decent 5-card suit, and looking at
the Vul game bonus at IMPs. Why would I do anything else?

--
Dennis Cohen

[Adam Beneschan]

Assuming 1NT shows 15-17, it's clear that you want to be in game. I
don't see anything to be gained by bidding 3C, which seems like the
only viable alternative you could be thinking of.

Unless this is a trick question and you play 12-14 and you had an ace
covered up? Now maybe you should do something else in case you have a
combined 28 HCP club slam. However, I don't worry about things like
that because I don't make that kind of mistake--years of reading r.g.b
has trained me to be suspicious of things like 2=3=3=4 hands. :)

-- Adam

[Douglas Newlands]

Looks like a unanimous panel prediction!

doug

[peter cheung]

in imp 3nt is the bid

[Charles Brenner]

On Jan 30, 6:43 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:

I understand 2NT to mean "bid on most of the time". By that standard
this hand should continue even assuming the opening range is 16-18.

By the way, I don't understand those who suggest a distinction between
MP and IMP or according to vulnerability. Partner has already taken
that into account before bidding 2NT, so it doesn't make sense to
doubly incorporate the same judgment. Of course, I might have a view
that vul at IMPs partner should never bid 2NT, but that's a different
matter.

Charles

[Charles Brenner]

On Jan 30, 7:22 pm, Adam Beneschan <a...@irvine.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 6:43 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > I am just curious as to what your action would be on the following
> > hand.
> > Red vs Green Imps
>
> > Ax
> > Kxx
> > QJx
> > AQTxx
>
> > 1NT (P)  2NT (P)
> > ?
> > 2NT is invit. The xs are very low
>
> Assuming 1NT shows 15-17, it's clear that you want to be in game.  I
> don't see anything to be gained by bidding 3C, which seems like the
> only viable alternative you could be thinking of.

I forgot about that, but in fact I've had good results bidding a minor
on-the-way in this situation. The first time was at rubber bridge. I
figured my partner might be confused or even annoyed, but would not
dare pass, and indeed our auction went 1NT-2NT-3C-3NT. Club lead
averted, game made. Of course you cannot do this all the time in a
partnership, so with one partner I made an agreement. Eventually it
came up: 1NT - 2NT - 3C alert! - 3NT. On inquiry about his alert of
3C, my partner dutifully explained "It doesn't mean anything." The
opponent suspiciously led a club, which turned out to be what I needed
to make the game.

Charles

[Eric Leong]

I would bid 3C to give partner a choice of games.
It is possible that 5C has a chance of making but 3NT doesn't.
For example, give partner something like: S Kxx H x D K10xxx C Kxxx.

Eric Leong

[David Goldfarb]

In article <4ed0a9b7-8c2c-4173...@s8g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>,
Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:

3NT. Not close.

--
David Goldfarb |"The Uncertainty Principle allows particles
goldf...@gmail.com | to travel faster than light over short distances."
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | -- Stephen Hawking

[Andrew]

On Jan 30, 6:43 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:

3NT = 10
P = -10

[derek]

3D, since that's what my partner would be asking :-)

But for an invitational, 2N, I'll bid 3N on the grounds that "nobody's
good enough to play in 2N". You're only problem is probably if they
have a heart fit and don't lead one.

[Adam Beneschan]

On Jan 31, 6:46 am, derek <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 10:43 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > I am just curious as to what your action would be on the following
> > hand.
> > Red vs Green Imps
>
> > Ax
> > Kxx
> > QJx
> > AQTxx
>
> > 1NT (P)  2NT (P)
> > ?
> > 2NT is invit. The xs are very low
>
> 3D, since that's what my partner would be asking :-)

Really? My partner would be asking me to bid 3C if I like diamonds,
so that's what I bid. I guess your partnership reverses the responses
or requires A or K for a preaccept?

-- Adam

[Lorne]

"Player" wrote in message
news:4ed0a9b7-8c2c-4173...@s8g2000pbj.googlegroups.com...

...........................

A 5 card suit (especially when headed by AQ10) is worth more than a point so
this is a clear max if your range is 15-17. I would raise NV in MP's.

[Will in New Haven]

Partner has only invited and he (or she) knows that we are vul at IMP.
So I'm not thrilled to be in the middle of the range. However, the
fifth Club is a plus, so I am going. 3C, looking to find out if we
belong in 5C instead of 3N, would only be considered in a very
practiced partnership.

--
Will in New Haven

[Nick France]

On Jan 30, 9:43 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:

3NT assuming I am playing 15-17 notrump. I have 16 HCP and a decent 5
card suit.

Nick France

[Frances]

On Jan 31, 4:21 pm, Will in New Haven

You and Eric both mention 3C as a choice-of-game call.
Eric's suggested hand of Kxx x K10xxx Kxxx is silly because it isn't a
2NT bid, but ignoring that point for the time being,...

Why do you think 3C should mean 'do we belong in 5C instead of 3NT?'
when it could equally mean 'Do we belong in 3C or 3NT'?
In a slightly different scenario, we would play 3C as something like

Ax
Kxx
Qx
AJ9xxx

meaning "if you have something useful in clubs we're probably making
3NT, if you don't we're likely to be better in 3C"

If you can't face the thought of opening 1NT with a 6-card minor, then
this meaning is less useful.

[Thomas Dehn]

3NT. Not close vulnerable at IMPs.


Thomas

[jogs]

3NT. But on the other side of the table I
never, repeat never invite with 2NT. 10+
bid 3NT. With less just pass in tempo.
Aggressive opponents often reopen with
air.

[PriorKnowledge]

One of my favorite Kit Woolsey quote is: "The best game try is bid
game and try to make it!"

[Adam Beneschan]

We've given up on the 2NT invitation also, but playing 15-17 I'd go to
game with just about any 9-count. Even if partner has a minimum, 15-
opposite-9 can still often make game in the hands of a good dummy
player (such as my partner).

-- Adam

[derek]

My partner definitely requires an A or K. But that 3C is looking
attractive :-)

[Mark Brader]

> 3NT. But on the other side of the table I
> never, repeat never invite with 2NT. 10+
> bid 3NT. With less just pass in tempo.
> Aggressive opponents often reopen with
> air.

Even after the alert of the pass?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "I can be gullible about these kinds of things.
m...@vex.net | Or so people tell me, and I believe them."

[Adam Beneschan]

On Jan 31, 1:47 pm, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
> > 3NT.  But on the other side of the table I
> > never, repeat never invite with 2NT.  10+
> > bid 3NT.  With less just pass in tempo.
> > Aggressive opponents often reopen with
> > air.
>
> Even after the alert of the pass?

I don't see why an alert would be required. Pass means "I want to
play in 1NT and have no interest in looking for game". That's a
standard meaning, and the fact that jogs doesn't look for game on some
hands that others would, doesn't make the call alertable, as I
understand it.

-- Adam

[Eric Leong]

On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:02:50 AM UTC-8, Frances wrote:
> On Jan 31, 4:21 pm, Will in New Haven

> <bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 9:43 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am just curious as to what your action would be on the following
> > > hand.
> > > Red vs Green Imps
> >
> > > Ax
> > > Kxx
> > > QJx
> > > AQTxx
> >
> > > 1NT (P)  2NT (P)
> > > ?
> > > 2NT is invit. The xs are very low
> > > Ron
> >
> > Partner has only invited and he (or she) knows that we are vul at IMP.
> > So I'm not thrilled to be in the middle of the range. However, the
> > fifth Club is a plus, so I am going. 3C, looking to find out if we
> > belong in 5C instead of 3N, would only be considered in a very
> > practiced partnership.
> >
> > --
> > Will in New Haven
>
> You and Eric both mention 3C as a choice-of-game call.
> Eric's suggested hand of Kxx x K10xxx Kxxx is silly because it isn't a
> 2NT bid, but ignoring that point for the time being,...
>

Given that you open 1NT on some 14 counts like

S Ax H AKJ10x D xx C Qxx

one would think inviting with this hand with normal Standard American responses is just right. Also, with shortness one would think you might allow yourself to be a little lucky to find a better alternative game or even a slam. For example, if partner could bid 3S to show five spades with say:

S AQJxx H Qxx D Ax C Axx

would you rather be in 4S or 3NT on the probable heart lead?

Further, if partner had:

S Ax H Qxx D Axxxx C AQx

would you not like to give the partnership a chance to get to 6D making rather than 3NT going down on a heart lead?

> Why do you think 3C should mean 'do we belong in 5C instead of 3NT?'
> when it could equally mean 'Do we belong in 3C or 3NT'?
> In a slightly different scenario, we would play 3C as something like
>
> Ax
> Kxx
> Qx
> AJ9xxx
>
> meaning "if you have something useful in clubs we're probably making
> 3NT, if you don't we're likely to be better in 3C"
>
> If you can't face the thought of opening 1NT with a 6-card minor, then
> this meaning is less useful.

Choosing to play 3C as a choice between 3NT or a club contract is an alternative but an inferior choice. One would think that since game pays a bonus you want to gear bidding at imps to cater for the biggest swing. One would think being in 5C
making when 3NT goes down at the other table is far more rewarding.

Finally, if you are playing a tougher team say in a US National such as the consisting of well known Italians, Poles, or Dutch etc bidding 3NT is just praying for a push board. How do you think your side is supposed to win imps on this board? Obviously, your opponents are going to be in some game. I would think that it should be then really obvious that you want to find a making game other than 3NT when 3NT goes down.

Eric Leong

[Player]

Thanks for the answers. I bid 3NT - of course - and was told I needed
to learn to play. Well....yes, maybe, but not on this hand.
Ron

[Adam Beneschan]

On Jan 31, 3:59 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the answers. I bid 3NT - of course - and was told I needed
> to learn to play.

Before or after you went down?

(just kidding) :) :) :)
-- Adam

[Player]

During the play, Adam. BBO hand.

[Fred.]

I still use the 2NT raise but give it the meaning:
"I think we should be in game, but I'm giving
you a chance to pass a minimum you don't like."

I could easily live without it.

Fred.

[Frances]

Actually, no I don't, personally I open it 1H. It is, however, worth
opening a strong NT if you open all hands with a 5-card major 1NT.

> one would think inviting with this hand with normal Standard American responses is just right.

Why don't you say "I think" instead of "one would think" all the time?

> Also, with shortness one would think you might allow yourself to be a little lucky to find a better alternative game or even a slam. For example, if partner could bid 3S to show five spades with say:
>
> S AQJxx  H Qxx  D Ax  C Axx
>
> would you rather be in 4S or 3NT on the probable heart lead?
>

I'd have opened 1S on that hand. Whether or not I include 5-card
majors in my 1NT opening (unless I was playing 16-18).

> Further, if partner had:
>
> S Ax  H Qxx  D Axxxx  C AQx
>
> would you not like to give the partnership a chance to get to 6D making rather than 3NT going down on a heart lead?
>

But more relevantly on your sample 3-1-5-4 game force, I would use
whatever method I have agreed to show a 3-suiter with short hearts.

> > Why do you think 3C should mean 'do we belong in 5C instead of 3NT?'
> > when it could equally mean 'Do we belong in 3C or 3NT'?
> > In a slightly different scenario, we would play 3C as something like
>
> > Ax
> > Kxx
> > Qx
> > AJ9xxx
>
> > meaning "if you have something useful in clubs we're probably making
> > 3NT, if you don't we're likely to be better in 3C"
>
> > If you can't face the thought of opening 1NT with a 6-card minor, then
> > this meaning is less useful.
>
> Choosing to play 3C as a choice between 3NT or a club contract is an alternative but an inferior choice. One would think that since game pays a bonus you want to gear bidding at imps to cater for the biggest swing. One would think being in 5C
> making when 3NT goes down at the other table is far more rewarding.
>

Yes, making 5C instead of going off in 3NT is a good thing. That
doesn't mean that it is best to play 1NT-2NT-3C as forcing.
Personally, I think that if responder has a hand particularly suitable
for suit play, he doesn't bid 2NT.

> Finally, if you are playing a tougher team say in a US National such as the consisting of well known Italians, Poles, or Dutch etc bidding 3NT is just praying for a push board. How do you think your side is supposed to win imps on this board? Obviously, your opponents are going to be in some game. I would think that it should be then really obvious that you want to find a making game other than 3NT when 3NT goes down.
>

This is a bit strange. Do you think the Monogasques, Italians, Poles
or Dutch don't play in European events? Not every good player has yet
emigrated to the US.

Anyway, at no point have a said that I would rather be in 3NT going
off rather than 5C making. I am observing that
(i) if you aren't in a regular partnership, you shouldn't bid 3C
because partner might pass it
(ii) if you are in a regular partnership, you shouldn't need to bid 3C
forcing because partner has a way of showing invites or game forces
that have interest in playing not in NT.

> Eric Leong- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[derek]

On Jan 31, 7:59 pm, Player <ron...@msn.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the answers. I bid 3NT - of course - and was told I needed
> to learn to play. Well....yes, maybe, but not on this hand.

LOL. Presumably by that point the hand must have been over, so did
you make it? If you did, it would appear this hand showed neither a
need to learn to "play" or "bid". If you didn't, I think you owed
your partner an apology: something like "I'm sorry. Over a 2N
invitation, I obviously should have made it".

[Will in New Haven]

That is why I specified that the 3C bid could only be considered in a
practiced partnership. Either meaning is reasonable, for some value of
reasonable, but a practiced partnership would have some basis for
knowing which they were playing and for knowing what responder's
continuations, if any, meant.

I find the choice of game meaning more appealing at IMP vulnerable but
I can see your point.

--
Will in New Haven

All change for round Nine; slow pairs please go home

[Barry Margolin]

In article
<d3ed2bb1-f6af-4dc0...@s9g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,

When a BBO random says something like that, it usually says more about
him than you. Especially if it's accompanied by a complaint that your
self-assigned rating is too high.

--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

[Paul Hightower]

"Player" <ron...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:4ed0a9b7-8c2c-4173...@s8g2000pbj.googlegroups.com...

>I am just curious as to what your action would be on the following
> hand.
> Red vs Green Imps
>
> Ax
> Kxx
> QJx
> AQTxx
>
> 1NT (P) 2NT (P)
> ?
> 2NT is invit. The xs are very low
> Ron

3NT, fairly automatic, unless partner thinks he should invite with 7 hcp
under these conditions.

[Paul Hightower]

"Lorne" <lorne_a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xeUVq.5695$Ep3...@newsfe08.iad...

Real-world data suggests a five card suit is worth 0.4 points, per the
French Bridge Federation. Have you seen other data?

[Paul Hightower]

"Adam Beneschan" <ad...@irvine.com> wrote in message
news:042517cf-8446-4d1a...@g27g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...

-------------------------------------------------------------------

It is defintely correct to blast 3NT rather than pass with 9 opposite 15-17
under double-dummy analysis, and real-world declarers make 3NT significantly
more often than would be expected double-dummy. Adam's strategy would have
to yield a lot of juciy penalties to justify passing with 9.

[Eric Leong]

On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 5:31:05 AM UTC-8, Frances wrote:

> On Jan 31, 11:33 pm, Eric Leong <ewleo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:02:50 AM UTC-8, Frances wrote:
> > > On Jan 31, 4:21 pm, Will in New Haven

Then I think you are being inconsistent. You would open 1NT if the five card suit was a minor because you fear if partner had a nine or ten count you might miss 3NT after a 1NT response from partner or a 1NT rebid by you. Similarly, if partner bids 1S or 1NT you have the same risk of missing 3NT.

>
> > one would think inviting with this hand with normal Standard American responses is just right.
>
> Why don't you say "I think" instead of "one would think" all the time?

Because maybe other players might reach the same conclusion.

>
> > Also, with shortness one would think you might allow yourself to be a little lucky to find a better alternative game or even a slam. For example, if partner could bid 3S to show five spades with say:
> >
> > S AQJxx  H Qxx  D Ax  C Axx
> >
> > would you rather be in 4S or 3NT on the probable heart lead?
> >
>
> I'd have opened 1S on that hand. Whether or not I include 5-card
> majors in my 1NT opening (unless I was playing 16-18).

So what? It is a question of allowing different partners who are not your clone to have different not totally unacceptable views who choose to open 1NT with this hand.

>
> > Further, if partner had:
> >
> > S Ax  H Qxx  D Axxxx  C AQx
> >
> > would you not like to give the partnership a chance to get to 6D making rather than 3NT going down on a heart lead?
> >
>
> But more relevantly on your sample 3-1-5-4 game force, I would use
> whatever method I have agreed to show a 3-suiter with short hearts.

Again so what? You can not presume the partnership in question has this toy unless the poster told you so.

>
> > > Why do you think 3C should mean 'do we belong in 5C instead of 3NT?'
> > > when it could equally mean 'Do we belong in 3C or 3NT'?
> > > In a slightly different scenario, we would play 3C as something like
> >
> > > Ax
> > > Kxx
> > > Qx
> > > AJ9xxx
> >
> > > meaning "if you have something useful in clubs we're probably making
> > > 3NT, if you don't we're likely to be better in 3C"
> >
> > > If you can't face the thought of opening 1NT with a 6-card minor, then
> > > this meaning is less useful.
> >
> > Choosing to play 3C as a choice between 3NT or a club contract is an alternative but an inferior choice. One would think that since game pays a bonus you want to gear bidding at imps to cater for the biggest swing. One would think being in 5C
> > making when 3NT goes down at the other table is far more rewarding.
> >
>
> Yes, making 5C instead of going off in 3NT is a good thing. That
> doesn't mean that it is best to play 1NT-2NT-3C as forcing.

True but it also doesn't mean 3C is best played as not forcing either. However, if I am wrong you gain 4-5 imps depending on the vulnerability whereas if I am right I gain 10-12 imps depending on the vulnerability. Certainly, with the greater reward possible I have a bigger margin for being wrong than your position.

> Personally, I think that if responder has a hand particularly suitable
> for suit play, he doesn't bid 2NT.

You might as well say you don't invite much with a generic system with invitational hands with a stiff or void opposite a one notrump opening bid.

>
> > Finally, if you are playing a tougher team say in a US National such as the consisting of well known Italians, Poles, or Dutch etc bidding 3NT is just praying for a push board. How do you think your side is supposed to win imps on this board? Obviously, your opponents are going to be in some game. I would think that it should be then really obvious that you want to find a making game other than 3NT when 3NT goes down.
> >
>
> This is a bit strange. Do you think the Monogasques, Italians, Poles
> or Dutch don't play in European events? Not every good player has yet
> emigrated to the US.

No, there are a large number of Europeans who have won World Championships who come to the US Nationals regularly. They don't live in the US. Furthermore, just because the size, depth, and length of the US national tournaments and the regular participation of the top international players who have won world championships I am of the opinion that the competition at the US nationals is just more challenging.

>
> Anyway, at no point have a said that I would rather be in 3NT going
> off rather than 5C making. I am observing that
> (i) if you aren't in a regular partnership, you shouldn't bid 3C
> because partner might pass it

Games and slam pay a bonus so in traditional Standard American the system is geared to finding the best games and slams. In particular, after a limited invitational bid, a new suit bid is a choice of games. However, in my partnerships we have a meta rule for undiscussed situations: "If a bid could be forcing the bid is forcing." The main reason for this rule is if the bid was supposed to be not forcing we may recover in the play. However, if the bid was forcing and we play it there the partnership has no way to recover in the play.

> (ii) if you are in a regular partnership, you shouldn't need to bid 3C
> forcing because partner has a way of showing invites or game forces
> that have interest in playing not in NT.

I think a traditional 2NT invitational bid is a useful bid because it:
1. Allows partner to get out in a part score when he doesn't want to be in game and game is inferior.
2. Allows the partnership to investigate alternative games or even a slam.
Playing a very strong team you can't just back waiting for the opponents to make a mistake and expect to win. You have to investigate every alternative to allow yourself to get lucky. You may not be lucky all the time but if you allow yourself to be lucky you will win far more often.

I think you tend to argue bidding where you are on one side of the table and your clone is on the other side. You play conventions where the poster didn't give that option or didn't have that option. So many of your replies are in the "So what?" category. I am a little more flexible in allowing different partners to having not quite the same views for more generic responses.

Eric Leong

[Mark Brader]

>>> 3NT. But on the other side of the table I
>>> never, repeat never invite with 2NT. 10+
>>> bid 3NT. With less just pass in tempo.
>>> Aggressive opponents often reopen with
>>> air.

>> Even after the alert of the pass?

> I don't see why an alert would be required. Pass means "I want to
> play in 1NT and have no interest in looking for game". That's a

> standard meaning...

That makes it natural; it doesn't make it non-alertable. In the ACBL
there's a general rule that highly unexpected agreements require an
alert, and I think a pass that routinely contains up to 9 HCP in this
sequence qualifies. (Yes, I'm assuming it is the ACBL.)
--
Mark Brader "Metal urgy. The urge to use metals.
Toronto That was humans, all right."
m...@vex.net -- Terry Pratchett: Truckers

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[Adam Beneschan]

On Feb 1, 3:44 pm, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
> >>> 3NT.  But on the other side of the table I
> >>> never, repeat never invite with 2NT.  10+
> >>> bid 3NT.  With less just pass in tempo.
> >>> Aggressive opponents often reopen with
> >>> air.
> >> Even after the alert of the pass?
> > I don't see why an alert would be required.  Pass means "I want to
> > play in 1NT and have no interest in looking for game".  That's a
> > standard meaning...
>
> That makes it natural; it doesn't make it non-alertable.

Please note carefully that I used the term "standard" rather than
"natural". I did that on purpose.

>  In the ACBL
> there's a general rule that highly unexpected agreements require an
> alert, and I think a pass that routinely contains up to 9 HCP in this
> sequence qualifies.  (Yes, I'm assuming it is the ACBL.)

Except that an agreement that "pass means no interest in looking for
game" does not, in its definition, carry any information about HCP
range. I've always felt the same way about the auction 1NT-3NT, which
means "This is where we're playing, now shut up and try to make it".
If I have a partner that sometimes bids 3NT on hands where every other
player in the room would do something different (say, hands with a
long major), that *still* does not mean we have a different agreement
than everybody else. It just means partner's judgment is different
than everybody else's. And since the agreement is the same as the
standard, there would be no reason to alert it.

I have pretty much the same opinion about this pass of 1NT, although
there's an added complication that the system has no invitational bid
and thus there's an inference that the pass of 1NT has a wider range.
But does this make the agreement "highly unusual", or is this just an
inference (as opposed to an agreement)? And as I recall, inferences
from the failure to make other available calls aren't alertable, even
if those other calls are nonstandard. I just don't think the terms
are well-defined enough to come to a definite answer.

But since this is a murky question, and since it's hard for me to
accept that a deviation of 1 HCP (maybe 2 in some cases) from how the
majority plays should be considered *highly* unusual and unexpected, I
find it hard to accept that this pass should be alertable.

-- Adam

[Fred.]

Yes. It's ego protenction to tell yourself and
everybody else that you just lost to your opponent
because of the opponent's stupidity or ignorance.

Of course it's a rather transparent and stupid
form of ego protection.

I used to play in a club game against an opponent
who repeatedly maintained that if I had known what I was
doing at the bridge table I would have fallen for his
latest psyche. You'd think his regular partner would
have sought someone with a better plan.

Fred.

[Steve Willner]

On 2012-01-30 9:43 PM, Player wrote:
> Red vs Green Imps
> Ax
> Kxx
> QJx
> AQTxx
>
> 1NT (P) 2NT (P)
> ?
> 2NT is invit. The xs are very low

In an unfamiliar BBO partnership, I'm probably bidding 3NT like everyone
else, but there's a strong case for pass (or 3C, if you play that as
"stop"). Partner almost certainly has an 8-count or maybe 7 that he's
promoted, and game won't be very good. (With more, he'd have bid game
already; he can see the vulnerability too.) The counter- argument is
that if breaks are bad, even 2NT will fail, so it's best to be
optimistic. The counter-counter-argument is that we will have told
opponents we don't have a lot extra, so it's easy for them to double us
if they see bad breaks.

In a regular partnership against strong opponents, I think I would pass.
Against weak opponents, I'd still bid game to avoid a swing.

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 swil...@nhcc.net
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA