A Close Call
With both vulnerable, LHO passes, partner opens 1
and RHO passes. You hold K75, 
JT9, 
9754, 
QT7. Your agreement is that a raise is wide-ranging, but you could also choose to further limit your hand with a forcing NT. What do you think?
Update on Saturday, December 31, 2005 at 05:12PM by Jeff Miller
Bernie held the following hand:
That looks like a game try to me, but Bernie elected to bid game. I understand that, since I could have some really good cards (
But my real point is the result. You obviously need the
So even though we both might have stretched a bit, and apparently both still think the other guy made a slightly inferior choice, we reached a playable vulnerable game. If either of us had been playing with a clone of himself, we would have missed it. There is a lesson here somewhere.
I bid 2S. Yes, my hand is square. Yes, I do have a couple of 10’s and NT might be a good place to play, but I don’t see how bidding 1NT forcing gets me any closer to that. I like taking up room with the direct raise.
December 27, 2005 Maribeth
2S is my preference even with the standard treatment - 1M-2M= constructive raise
December 27, 2005 Nik
2S. Certainly a minimum but I don’t like starting with a semi-forcing NT and yes I see I am 4333 with a six count. I like the spade king in particular as well as the heart sequence.
December 28, 2005 Jack Oest
1NT. 2S has the advantage of being a little more preemptive and the disadvantage of teasing partner into an expensive idiocy. At this vul, and with that hand, I have no interest in any form of preempt.
December 28, 2005 Sam
Sure seems attractive to use up the space and bid 2S but I think that raising directly with a hand that does not have a clear acceptance of at least one natural game try is too aggressive, so I will be content with 1NT on my K & R 4.9 count. Even if partner was able to make a game try showing diamond shortness my acceptance would be fear filled and often lead to a bad result. The nice 10’s would be far more valuable if more dummy entries were sure.
December 29, 2005 Bill Wickham
If I had 3 small spades and the K elsewhere I might bid 1NT first. I suppose if there was a reason to believe my partner would make any light game tries he might have, I might choose to resort to this tactic.
December 29, 2005 Phil Warden
imho, 1nt clearcut. primary influence is that neither opponent bid and at this vul is unlikely to start now. thus ist priority is to describe hand as accurately as possible. I don’t want partner to make a move with a “tweener” that might get us to high. with no oppo bidding unlikely to have 1nt passed.
December 31, 2005 bernie miller
2S - While I agree this is a dead minimum and that I would not accept invitations, the intermediate spots may be helpful. For example, assume that partner had Kxx in either hearts or clubs. These spot cards tun these combinations from awful to not-so-bad.
December 31, 2005 Steve
i think one of the least appreciated evaluations in bridge is that of a 6th trump. in the given hand if one held qjxxx, akx, ax, axx and got raised to 2s most wouldn’t consider less than game. the actual hand is the playing strength equivalent, just doesn’t look as good.
January 1, 2006 bernie miller
iwould bid 1nt jeff made good bid of 2s and won us 10imps
January 1, 2006 Mohan