[wyman]

This sequence is supposed to be an easy one. Maybe it is, but it seemed like so many things could be right.

Pick your form of scoring/colors if you want. When it was presented to me, we were w/r at teams, but I'm interested if your answer changes if the colors change or if this is MPs.
2N = reds, obviously.

---

[billw55]

I'll try 3♠, partner could still have two, and even with only one this may well be better than a red suit. If he is 0-6 in the majors, I will apologize, but that won't be often.

[Winstonm]

I think I will simply pass. This is unlikely to be doubled by opener and may well be as good of spot as we might have.

[broze]

Horrid spot. I might venture a pass here (worth it for p's face alone upon seeing the dummy). Plus, passing leaves us a lot of wriggle room if opps start doubling.

3♠ is a huge mistake imo - not only do you have nowhere to run to if opps start doubling but you could be sailing past three better contracts on a guess. Your best contract is probably 3♣ but obv you can't bid that to play.

[Zelandakh]

Over 2NT, 3♣ should ask for partner's better red suit (or to bid something else with the strong type). That gives us 2 ways of bidding 3♠, one direct and one via 3♣. One of these should be constructive and the other weak. By default I would think that the weak route was via 3♣ but I cannot remember ever reading of any standard on this. Assuming that is the case, it seems like a reasonable idea to stop in 3♥ if partner prefers them to diamonds. Passing could also be right but you would feel pretty silly if partner turns up with a monster.

[aguahombre]

broze, on 2013-November-19, 10:07, said:

Your best contract could well be 3♣ but obv you can't bid that to play.

If the 2NT overcall is not wide ranging, but rather normal attention to vulnerability, we could decide (and have decided) we don't need 3♣ as a range-ask or clarification ask. 3♣ to play is possible in that case. I don't know if it would be the best choice with this hand at all the different colors, however. At favorable, a simple preference to 3H might be most effective with a Partner who won't make silly sacrificial continuations.

With a split-range monster, Pard could continue over 3C; but I don't think she has one in this case.

[MrAce]

I think pass is worse than it looks regardless of your range for 2NT. You do not really need specific A or Kings in rounded suits. You don't need pd to hold a giant in order to make pass of 2 NT look ridiculous The spot cards in black suits we hold, are so good that they make life easy in worst case scenario.

I mean a very little help in black suits makes our hand huge for 4♠, such as.

xx KJxxx KJxxx Q

Ax QTxxx KJxxx x

x Axxxx KJxxx Qx

I think our hand owes at least 1 move to make and suggest spades. Pass is very pessimistic especially at IMPs and vulnerable to put it the polite way.

[mike777]

pass assuming 2nt is weak, with d and h.

[RSClyde]

I can virtually make 2♠ all by myself. "We're not doubled yet" isn't the right thinking at matchpoints. Besides, you have a lot of cards, it's not clear that anyone is intending to double anything.

[Fluffy]

Zelandakh, on 2013-November-19, 10:13, said:

Over 2NT, 3♣ should ask for partner's better red suit (or to bid something else with the strong type). That gives us 2 ways of bidding 3♠, one direct and one via 3♣. One of these should be constructive and the other weak. By default I would think that the weak route was via 3♣ but I cannot remember ever reading of any standard on this. Assuming that is the case, it seems like a reasonable idea to stop in 3♥ if partner prefers them to diamonds. Passing could also be right but you would feel pretty silly if partner turns up with a monster.

If the weak really shows a missfit, then direct 3♠ before partner can jumps around.