[Cyberyeti]

---

W opens a 12-14 no trump.

EW have no system to show an invite with diamonds, so the options are P/2N/3N.

In style, E would bid 3N with say 75% of balanced 12 counts and 2N with the rest of the 12s and about 80% of 11s, in terms of assessing what E should bid and whether W is bidding 3N over 2N.

[G_R__E_G]

I'd definitely bid 3NT with the east hand given the prescribed conditions.

[ArtK78]

I would never bid 3NT with the East cards opposite a 12-14 1NT.

What I would do is sign off in 3♦ using whatever methods are available to the partnership.

Quite frankly, with the East hand, I would be more worried that the opps had a playable contract in a major than I would be about missing a game.

Missing this "game" turns out to be no catastrophe. Assuming that the defenders attack one of the black suits at every opportunity (certainly not a sure thing) 3NT will depend upon the ♦Q being onside (or 2-2 diamonds with the A onside if that is your line of play).

If I were playing the methods that I use over a 10-12 1NT then I would bid 3♦, which is defined as "slightly invitational."

[gwnn]

At the risk of sitting on the fence, I think any approach is reasonable here (pass, sign off in diamonds, invite in diamonds, balanced invite, bid 3NT) and any outcome is OK (being in 1NT, 3♦, 2NT or 3NT).

If gwnn played with gwnn2, I think their auction would go 1NT-end or 1NT-3NT.

[wyman]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-28, 08:42, said:

Quite frankly, with the East hand, I would be more worried that the opps had a playable contract in a major

In my judgment, this is another way that raising can win. I'd probably invite with 2N. After 1N - p - p, opps are sure to come in. Aggressive opponents may also come in after a drop in 3D.

[gnasher]

It's hard to tell who's being serious here (starting with the original poster). To me it looks completely obvious to raise to 3NT, regardless of what other methods are available. I don't think that it requires much judgement to recognise this, and on the two hands I'd want to be in game at any form of scoring.

[Cyberyeti]

ArtK78, on 2012-February-28, 08:42, said:

I would never bid 3NT with the East cards opposite a 12-14 1NT.

What I would do is sign off in 3♦ using whatever methods are available to the partnership.

Quite frankly, with the East hand, I would be more worried that the opps had a playable contract in a major than I would be about missing a game.

Missing this "game" turns out to be no catastrophe. Assuming that the defenders attack one of the black suits at every opportunity (certainly not a sure thing) 3NT will depend upon the ♦Q being onside (or 2-2 diamonds with the A onside if that is your line of play).

If I were playing the methods that I use over a 10-12 1NT then I would bid 3♦, which is defined as "slightly invitational."

Your method of signing off in a minor will tell you partner has <4 diamonds and <5 clubs, had partner shown 4 diamonds, would you be interested ?

The danger is not what partner actually has where tbh I don't care that much whether I'm in it or not, but that partner has Axxx, xx, AJxx QJx or similar where 3N is excellent, and 2N doesn't get you there, and lots of 14 counts where 3N is poor and possibly dialling a number if it doesn't make AKxx, xx, xxx, AKxx is not only going -1 a lot of a time on a heart lead if the diamonds are 3-1 without a stiff ace onside, AKxx, xxx, Qx, KQxx is also revolting on a heart lead and potentially dialling quite a few.

As you might gather from the above, my view is the 5th option, don't bid 2N but idc what you do.

[daveharty]

3NT for me, sixth diamond with two sure entries tips it. I've been down before.

[aguahombre]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-February-28, 05:46, said:

EW have no system to show an invite with diamonds, so the options are P/2N/3N.

Since I dislike the idea of debating the conditions instead of answering the OP, I will first answer: 3NT ---Gnasher's rationale is fine.

Now, about the conditions: If the opponents are not weak-notrumpers, I would want a method to show an invite with diamonds available. That way, we could have an equivalent auction and partner's decision whether to accept the game try would beat them on judgement. If the opponents are also weak notrumpers, I would hope that they do have a system to invite with diamonds and will use it/guess wrong.

[Cyberyeti]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-28, 11:03, said:

Since I dislike the idea of debating the conditions instead of answering the OP, I will first answer: 3NT ---Gnasher's rationale is fine.

Now, about the conditions: If the opponents are not weak-notrumpers, I would want a method to show an invite with diamonds available. That way, we could have an equivalent auction and partner's decision whether to accept the game try would beat them on judgement. If the opponents are also weak notrumpers, I would hope that they do have a system to invite with diamonds and will use it/guess wrong.

Nice point but it's a county match so teams of 8 with 4 scores added and IMPed and it's early enough in the match that you have no clue what opps play.

[ggwhiz]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-28, 11:03, said:

Since I dislike the idea of debating the conditions

I actually think the conditions are key here and similar posts have helped me identify holes in my own agreements.

If I can bid 3♦ invitational to 3nt that is important to this system. If I can't I'm pinning the tail on the donkey and hoping it's not me. Perhaps 4-suit transfers with 2nt xfer to ♦ and 3♣ to show above average acceptance is the answer but something is needed.

I guess the odds favour signing off in 3♦ but it would be nice to have something more to go by.

[aguahombre]

GG: slightly better to quote the whole sentence, which said..."instead of answering the OP".

[ggwhiz]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-28, 12:34, said:

GG: slightly better to quote the whole sentence, which said..."instead of answering the OP".

Mea culpa but I just assumed anyone could go up a touch and see that I'm in agreement.

[nigel_k]

I think the odds favour 3NT, but signoff in diamonds is not obviously wrong. I would not invite with 2NT though, because I want to play either 3NT or diamonds and 2NT doesn't work as a compromise.

[Free]

With these constraints I'd just bid 3NT with the East hand. It has reasonable making chances, opps may even lead the wrong suit when our ♦s are running,...

[Codo]

I would like to have a tool for inivtational in a minor too.
But I would not use it on this hand. I would simply blast 3 NT with the east hand without breething too deep. At imps this is done within 0,0001 seconds, at imps it will take thousand times as long, but the outcome will be the same...

[whereagles]

1-3 does have some appeal..