Andrew Gumperz is a part-time bridge professional based in the SF bay area. He has numerous regional victories, but his proudest bridge accomplishment was upsetting the CAYNE team at the 2009 Spingold in Washington DC. In his spare time, Andrew enjoys musical theater, especially when his daughter is performing.
Dbl looks extremely obvious but I think there is more going on than meets the eye. Unless we are playing with a pinochle deck, there is a lot of hidden shape on this deal.
Partner must have some shape to justify his 3NT since he can't be bidding it ...
2NT could still be played as primary diamonds and secondary clubs.
--, xx, AKJTxx, Qxxxx = delayed 3♣
x, xx, AKJTxx, AQTx = delayed 2NT (less shape, more values)
x, Kxxx, AKJTxx, Ax = delayed 3♦
But frankly, we are counting angels dancing on the head of a pin. We'll wait ...
I don't care for 1NT for two reasons:
1. LHO has a known 5+ card suit. If LHO's suit had been a minor, the 1NT call on Txx would be far more attractive.
2. It suggests wastage in spades which may discourage partner from competing with a stiff ...
Perhaps I should edit my sentence. When I said, "The risks are the same" I meant that the size of the number you could go for is the same in both auctions, not that you were equally likely to get caught. The fact that they are many times more likely ...
A lot of IMPs rest on Eric's final decision.
* If slam had made, not taking the 800 sacrifice is giving away 11 IMPs.
* When slam is going down, taking a phantom 800 sacrifice costs as much as 17 IMPs (assuming your teammates stop in game, you have traded plus ...
IMO, hands with a 3-card difference in length should be treated as 1-suited so I prefer to preempt immediately.
2NT at this point is profoundly misguided--telling the opponents about your shape, without providing adequate preemption on a hand where you have little chance to win the auction.