[Hanoi5]

You hold:

♠---
♥QJT98x
♦AKTxxx
♣x

Your partner in second seat opens 2♦ which is either:

- Weak 2 in spades
- Weak 2 in hearts
- Strong and balanced 22-23 or 26-27

Three questions:

1- What do you guess your partner has?
2- What do you bid:
2♥ Pass or correct (also with hearts, but you have to bid them again over the expected 2♠)
2♠ Pass or correct (usually with good heart support and inviting to game)
2NT Asks partner about his hand
3♦ Natural and forcing
4♥ To play
3-

Spoiler

If your partner has the strong NT hand how often do you think it'll be better to play in diamonds?

[Lord Molyb]

1. Weak 2 in spades, but this was posted here so it's probably strong balanced 22-23 or weak two in hearts
2. 2NT
3. Whenever he has 3+ diamonds.

[hrothgar]

1. Partner is most likely to hold a weak 2 in Spades

2. I bid 2♠

3. If partner has a strong balanced hand, I am expecting a 5332 with 5 Spades. He should have 3 card support for one of the red suits. I suspect that NT plays pretty well in this case.

[PhilKing]

1. Partner has a hand that I will never allow to play in spades. 4♥ will almost certainly be a better spot than 2♠.

2. 2♥. Then over partner's presumed 2♠, 3♦. I play this as showing the red suits, invitational (a delayed 3♣ shows ♣s and ♥s).

Other hand types are handled as follows: after responding 2♥ and hearing the inevitable 2♠, 2NT puppets to 3♣, then you pass with clubs, bid 3♦ or 3♥ to play, or 3♠, invitational.

2♠ makes no sense. Even with no methods, just bid 2♥ then 3♥(or 4♥) - this should be better than flying off in a ridiculous 2♠. And partner can raise with an honour or three small.

3. Opposite a stong balance hand I want to play in no trumps. I keep going off on ruffs these days. Time will tell where we are headed.

[the hog]

Partner has a weak 2 in S.
I bid 2S now.

[mr1303]

I'm going to pass 2D. It's dollars to doughnuts that partner has a weak 2 in spades, which won't play well. 2D might well play better.

[PhilKing]

mr1303, on 2013-March-17, 04:33, said:

I'm going to pass 2D. It's dollars to doughnuts that partner has a weak 2 in spades, which won't play well. 2D might well play better.

There'll be plenty of strawberry jam to spread on that doughnut if you are wrong.

[Free]

I guess he has a weak two in ♠. This is quite obvious: we don't have ♠s and I presume RHO didn't show any amount of ♠s either, so chances are huge.

2♥. I don't want to play 2♠ opposite a weak two ♠. Not sure if 3♦ next should show the reds (for me it's just ♦s with a ♠ void which was hoping for opener to have ♥), but 4♦ definitely shows an extreme hand with at least 5-5 in the reds and no interest in ♠ whatsoever.

I think on average ♥ will definitely play better than ♦. It's easy to have a ♥ loser, and you can get rid of an additional ♦ loser when playing ♥. The opposite is hardly possible unless partner has ♥Ax and the King is onside.

[PhilKing]

Free, on 2013-March-17, 05:58, said:

2♥. I don't want to play 2♠ opposite a weak two ♠. Not sure if 3♦ next should show the reds (for me it's just ♦s with a ♠ void which was hoping for opener to have ♥), but 4♦ definitely shows an extreme hand with at least 5-5 in the reds and no interest in ♠ whatsoever.

Yeah, that might be best, since some of the times we don't make four of a red suit, the 4-1 break scuppers 3 as well (eg partner has xx Qx in the reds and they keep leading clubs). On a good day, we make 4♥ opposite a yarborough.

[gszes]

1/2. i dont much care what p has and do not care to guess--I will not
arbitrarily decide p has a weak 2 spades and pass or bid an equally
bad 2h. Bid 2s maybe just maybe the opps will run to 3c and we will
not have our heads handed to us. If p does not have a weak 2 in spades
our foresight will lead to a vastly improved contract than might ever be
acheived if we start with pass or 2h. The fact we are showing a willingness
to go to game if p has hearts will serve us well if p started with a strong
balanced hand because now we can bid diamonds and not worry about
p thinking we are weak.

3. I will rarely wish to play in dia (vs hearts) when p has a strong balanced hand

[PhilKing]

gszes, on 2013-March-18, 16:45, said:

1/2. i dont much care what p has and do not care to guess--I will not
arbitrarily decide p has a weak 2 spades and pass or bid an equally
bad 2h. Bid 2s maybe just maybe the opps will run to 3c and we will
not have our heads handed to us. If p does not have a weak 2 in spades
our foresight will lead to a vastly improved contract than might ever be
acheived if we start with pass or 2h. The fact we are showing a willingness
to go to game if p has hearts will serve us well if p started with a strong
balanced hand because now we can bid diamonds and not worry about
p thinking we are weak.

3. I will rarely wish to play in dia (vs hearts) when p has a strong balanced hand

This thread has put me on monkey tilt. THREE people are prepared to play in 2♠.

I mean, we are obviously loads down in 2♠ when 4♥ has got to be pretty close. What can possibly go wrong if you respond 2♥? Lefty may even have a 2♠ overcall.

If you don't like 2♥ bid 4♣. Partner will bid 4♥ (showing spades) and we keep them out of their possibly stone cold 3NT.

[the_clown]

I would just bid 4♥ and hope I can make it. Second choice is pass

[Free]

With normal holdings you respond in paradox, but with extreme hands you answer normally, based on the idea that it won't get passed out. Partner probably doesn't have this suit so he'll bid again, but if he happens to have the suit anyway, then opps will usually intervene (they have 20+HCP with 10+♠s on this hand). I've been playing multi for more than a decade and I've never encountered a hand where bidding this way turned into a disaster.

We only need ♥K or ♣A and game has good chances. Even after a non ♣ lead we may be able to make 4♥. I really don't understand why people think they should try to play 2♠ with so much potential in your own hand. Be glad you're playing multi and take the chances you have to show your own 2 suits!