[Hanoi5]

You're red and get:

♠xxx
♥T
♦AKQT8xx
♣Q9

And as you think of opening 3NT third hand, your partner initiates the bidding with 1NT, what's your bid?

[Echognome]

Depends somewhat on the form of scoring and your opening NT range.

For better or worse, I would:

Bid 3NT at MP's.

Transfer to diamonds a show heart shortness at IMPs (assuming I have this available). Otherwise I would transfer to diamonds and bid 3NT or just bid 3NT.

[mikeh]

Regardless of the scoring, bidding 3N seems silly to me. Opposite an admittedly prime hand such as Axx Axxx xx AKJx we have 13 Aces, assuming no diamond losers, and opposite a hand such as AKxx xxx Jx AKxx, we are down in 3N cold for 6♦.

While I am a big fan, at matchpoints, of not trying to win the board in the bidding...win it in the play...there are limits to that philosophy and this hand is way over my limit.

Of course, this is subject to methods, but this is posted in the A/E section so I assume we have the means to at least suggest a minor slam try.

I like playing 4 suit transfers, over which we have an easy 3♥, if shortness showing....it can't get any easier than that, imo. Yes, if we end up in 3N, we will have telegraphed our shortness, but when we rate to run a LOT of winners and no lead rates to embarrass us (if my partner bid 3N, I'd probably welcome a heart lead on this hand), I'm not worried.

If we don't have transfers, we presumably have other methods....walsh relay, for example, allows us to show the good diamond suit, but unfortunately doesn't allow us to show the shortness below 3N. I'd still use it tho....we probably have safety at 4N.

[Winstonm]

This is the perfect hand for 4-suit transfers with shortness showing follow up (Bridge World Standard I believe.) I don't think form of scoring matters

[andy_h]

Transfer to diamonds and show a heart shortage. And no, I didn't think about opening gambling 3NT at red in third seat.

[Jlall]

mikeh, on Dec 22 2009, 06:53 PM, said:

Regardless of the scoring, bidding 3N seems silly to me.

Yeah I agree. It seems like if you want to take a shot without science you bid 1N-4N or 1N-4C rather than showing your heart shortness, 1N-3N is really conservative amongst other things.

I am all for taking practical shots to avoid them making a good lead on us, but I would always just bid it straight and show my heart shortness and try to have an intelligent auction to the best spot. I think that using a combination of having superior methods than the field (can show heart shortness), and superior bidding judgment than the field (judging the slam decision well) is a great recipe for winning the board very often without having to resort to high variance tactics. I also don't feel like this hand is strong enough to warrant a blast, I really don't know if I want to be in slam or not.

[whereagles]

Just bid diamonds by whatever methods the system allows.

The alternative (which I prefer) is to show the heart singleton, if you happen to play something like splinters over 1NT.

[Hanoi5]

I blasted to 6NT. I didn't have any agreement with my partner to let me do a scientific approach, but in this particular case it was VERY succesful. People who reached 6♦ were surprised by a club ruff. My partner had a friendly lead:

♠Q9xx
♥Q9xx
♦9xxx
♣x

What would you have led? (I bet you should know since I'm asking...)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

depends on the methods you have av.

If you can make a transfer to show the diamond suit, it may be
wortwhile to do so, we dont play such methods, hence I would
simply bid 3NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gwnn]

I lead a diamond from that hand, looks like the safest lead. Safe leads vs 6NT or above, active leads vs 2♣ to 6♠ (generally speaking)

[effervesce]

Agree, I would have led a diamond too.