[Cyberyeti]

---

Is this a close decision or completely routine whether to pass or bid 3♥ ?

Edit: - sorry MP pairs scoring

[manudude03]

I find aces and kings play better in suits, so 3H it is.

[Phil]

Scoring? It matters.

[SteveMoe]

Trumps play better when you can ruff in the short hand. 12 opposite 12 makes 3N 50% of the time. 11 opposite 13 (with a known 5-3 fit) seems about as probable. I would bid 3N playing IMPS and flip a 3N/Pass coin in MPs.

[nige1]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-April-17, 16:55, said:

Is this a close decision or completely routine whether to pass or bid 3♥ ?

---

Agree with SteveMoe and Richard Pavlicek's suit fit analysis.

At imps, especially when vulnerable, 3N seems OK . Not-vul, at MPs, it's closer but, again, 3N seems better than Pass and much better than 3♥ or 4♥.

[WesleyC]

Definitely 3NT at IMPs.

No strong opinion at MPs.

[billw55]

No suit, no spots, no ruffing potential, scattered honors. I guess my hand could be worse, but not by much. Pass.

[P_Marlowe]

3H.

If partner thinks 3NT is an option, he can bid 3NT himself.
The 2NT does not promise an bal. hand, it only denies a 6th heart.
But partners hand may improve, if he hears about a fit.

If you want to be in game, 4H.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[johnu]

3♥ While this hand probably has no ruffing values, responder may have a strategic short suit so instead of losing extra tricks in the defender's long suit, you can ruff.

[rmnka447]

3 ♥ This isn't a good 13. Unsupported honors with bad spots especially ♠ Q732 discourage me on this hand.

[Cyberyeti]

What actually happened was that the 2N was really slow. It was also a misbid as the 2N bidder had a 14 count and gleefully bid 4♥ over 3♥.

It also IMO throws up a hole in the rules.

The ruling was that a slow 2N could be light or heavy so doesn't really give any UI, so there are no constraints.

My contention would be that:

If it's light, you probably want to play in hearts as you don't have the stops.
If it's heavy, you want to give partner another go
If it's offshape you want to play in hearts

The only time 2N is likely to be right is opposite the stereotypical 5332 11 count which you know he can't have.

3N was played 4 times and made exactly twice and +1 twice. 4♥ makes 10 most of the time with one 11 and a few 9s.

Quote

I find aces and kings play better in suits, so 3H it is.

I find this curious too, Kelsey in his books gives numerous examples of hands where Axx is better than KQx in 3N because you have 8 other tricks and don't have time to establish the KQx, but this is the argument my opp used.

[helene_t]

WesleyC, on 2016-April-17, 22:05, said:

Definitely 3NT at IMPs.

I have a vague memory about some sims that showed that you should never play 2NT nonvulnerable at IMPs, but then partner's 2NT bid should be forcing.

FWIW I would probably pass, and given the UI I agree with CY that I have to pass.

[PhilG007]

I would have actually opened a 'prepared' 1♣ on the South hand hoping for a response in spades.
Hands like this one,where there is no meat on the bones,give me the jitters in No Trumps.

[manudude03]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-April-19, 03:42, said:

I find this curious too, Kelsey in his books gives numerous examples of hands where Axx is better than KQx in 3N because you have 8 other tricks and don't have time to establish the KQx, but this is the argument my opp used.

It's easy to come up with examples where you would rather have Axx than KQx if you are playing in a no-trump contract. It is just as easy to come up with hands where you would rather have the KQx. It is comparing apples and oranges though since we are picking the strain, not our cards. When partner transfers and bids NT, they must have shortage somewhere and when your points are spread out between only a few cards it means that you will likely only have 1 stop in whatever suit they lead and you would be relying on being able to run off a lot of tricks to make your contract. In suit contracts however, they cannot run their suit since you can just ruff. When your cards are softer, with a lot of queens and jacks, the opponents are more likely to have fast tricks rather than slow tricks, and so NT becomes more favourable. At game level there is also the rather obvious case at game level where you simply have 4 top losers and so you are off in 4M, but had enough tricks to make 3N.

For what it's worth, in the UI case, I would agree with you and would feel compelled to pass.

[Wackojack]

PhilG007, on 2016-April-19, 08:09, said:

I would have actually opened a 'prepared' 1♣ on the South hand hoping for a response in spades.
Hands like this one,where there is no meat on the bones,give me the jitters in No Trumps.

And if you get a 1♦, 1♥ or 2♣ response then double jitters. Remember you are playing 12-14 no trump. Just relax.

[manudude03]

Indeed, if things like having a doubleton, or having no stoppers scares you, don't play weak NT.

[Phil]

manudude03, on 2016-April-19, 16:11, said:

Indeed, if things like having a doubleton, or having no stoppers scares you, don't play weak NT.

And oddly enough, we have none of those flaws and yet...

[manudude03]

Phil, on 2016-April-19, 16:17, said:

And oddly enough, we have none of those flaws and yet...

Well, as someone who plays against a weak NT more often than not, I've come across people who hate opening 1NT with 4333 hands, and hate opening 1NT with a doubleton .

[PhilG007]

manudude03, on 2016-April-19, 16:11, said:

Indeed, if things like having a doubleton, or having no stoppers scares you, don't play weak NT.

I do play weak NT....but only when playing ACOL. Playing SAYC its strong NT everytime

[manudude03]

PhilG007, on 2016-April-20, 12:19, said:

I do play weak NT....but only when playing ACOL. Playing SAYC its strong NT everytime

Well, I agree that when you agree to play a system, you play whatever is in the system (though there is Dutch Acol which isn't really in the Acol* family). However you seemed to suggest not doing earlier. One of the often quoted advantages of a weak NT is that when you don't open a weak NT, you either have extra points or extra shape, the OP hand has neither.

ps. Pretty common forum pet peeve here, but Acol isn't an acronym for anything, so shouldn't be in caps.