[Antrax]

MPs, unfavourable. RHO deals and opens 2♣ (strong artificial)
♠x
♥QJTxxx
♦AJTxx
♣x

Help.

[antonylee]

2♥ should be enough (if partner raises, that's good, if not perhaps I don't want to be higher...), though I may try 2N if it shows two places to play.

[wank]

yes it's unfavourable but many things in life are unfavourable. i would just bid 4♥

[Cyberyeti]

By my methods 2N which is 2 suited without clubs. Not sure what I'd do playing standard, possibly just 2♥ in the hope that it goes something like P/X-P-2♠/N so I can bid 3♦.

[han]

If I go to the 3-level I would bid 3H, not 2NT. 2NT may be a little safer (although that isn't 100% clear) but it gives the opponents more room and will make the play easier.

4H at these colors seems a little insane, 2H a little too cautious.

[Antrax]

han, on 2012-January-19, 04:51, said:

If I go to the 3-level I would bid 3H, not 2NT. 2NT may be a little safer (although that isn't 100% clear) but it gives the opponents more room and will make the play easier.

4H at these colors seems a little insane, 2H a little too cautious.

Parsing...
So your bid is 3♥?

[Zelandakh]

Antrax, on 2012-January-19, 05:15, said:

So your bid is 3♥?

Mine too (unless I somehow happen to have 3♦ as the red suits in my bag). I like this 3M jump to be super-wide-ranging. Tip: B/Is hardly ever sit for 3♥X here.

[Cthulhu D]

Hey I really like the idea of three diamonds as a shapely two suit. Three hearts. Could be the majors. Works better than suction there too

[phil_20686]

I will bit 2h and hope to bid 3d if I get the chance, that will be plenty at red vs green. If rho is two suited, as seems likely, it is just about possible we could be making 11 tricks.

[Fluffy]

I would also bid 3♥. 4♥ at other vulnerabilities, maybe 4NT at favourable with some imaginative partner, but that's a little crazy.

[billw55]

phil_20686, on 2012-January-25, 06:48, said:

If rho is two suited, as seems likely, it is just about possible we could be making 11 tricks.

That seems a little optimistic to me, considering we have 6 losers in hand and RHO has opened strong.

But I do agree it's a decent looking hand.

[Phil]

I know it sounds strange, but I am going to pass. Its quite likely that RHO has spades, and if we get overactive in hearts, they rate to find out that there is no heart duplication.

If I were decide to show my two suiter (assuming I could), I might as well be putting my hand on the table for declarer to play. We aren't buying it at this vulnerability.

Even if this weren't the case, what do I expect to gain by bidding? Partner would need to know about my 11 red cards to make an intelligent five level decision

[mycroft]

Well, it does depend if this pair is one of those who thinks that since ♠AKQJTxxx -- Kx xxx is "8-and-one-half tricks", it's a 2♣ opener. If I think (or know) that's so, I'll compete - possibly, even with the vulnerability, 4NT. Definitely 2♥...4♦. Let opener's partner figure out if I have the hand I have (4♥ might even make!) or -- JTxxxxx QJTxxx --, and 7 of either black suit is on for -500 or less. Also, if it is this kind of pair, and responder does hit 4♥ and it's *right*, opener may still pull it because he's afraid he doesn't have the 4 tricks most people would promise.

If I expect there really is a 2♣ opener behind me, I'm likely to be a bit more conservative (mostly because of that ♥A!)

It's hands like this one - and they do come up - that are why 2 strong, artificial ♣ should promise defence as well as strength.

[antonylee]

I kind of dislike re-entering the auction on the next round with 4♦. I said earlier that I'd bid 2♥ but I can agree with 3♥. However, if you really want to show both suits I think you should do it immediately (e.g. 2NT); getting in the auction again after (2♣)-2♥-(2♠)-P-(3♠) with 4♦, for example, achieves very little except giving the opponent's the choice of penalizing you. Even over (2♣)-2♥-(P)-P-(2/3♠), the preemptive value of 4♦ is fairly limited if there are agreements about responder's initial pass (e.g. positive for me) and his second call (forcing passes are on for me, and there is also the possibility of raising ♠ with 4♥). Though I can understand that 4♦ may throw more confusion against B/Is.

[nigel_k]

I agree with 3♥ but 4♥ could work. 2♥ is too little and showing a two suiter in this kind of situation makes the play too easy for them.

[mycroft]

As I said, I'd only do that (2♥ then 4♦) if my opponents were the type who will bid 2♣ with an overstrength preempt - because I *am* inviting them to double me - when either they don't feel comfortable doubling in case partner has that overstrength preempt hand or when opener feels like he can't sit for the double because he has the overstrength preempt hand.

The problem is that people think that it's okay to bid those hands 2♣; and, of course, they're right, because the opponents won't attack with hands like this against them because against a "proper" 2♣ opener, it would be insane. And they don't disclose that they do that, because they don't realize either that this is an issue or that anybody would want to defend differently against it.

And I know this is B/I, so I'm mostly pointing it out not so that people will bid like that with this 1651, but so that they realize the kind of problems they can have if they put their overstrength preempts into 2♣ because "I had 8.5 tricks, partner".