[phil_20686]

jillybean, on 2012-February-26, 23:22, said:

---

We wrong sided the 3N contract and got the killer heart lead. In my ideal world, 2♦ does not deny a 4cM so North bids 2♠/2♦
and South gets the contract.

Its not exactly trivial to make by south either.

Suppose there is a spade lead, didnt look too closely but it looks like the normal line is to unblock the spades play a club to the ace (as worried about a heart through), and bank on the diamond finesse working. when it loses declarer will have only 3d 4s 1c.

[aguahombre]

jillybean, on 2012-February-26, 23:22, said:

---

We wrong sided the 3N contract and got the killer heart lead. In my ideal world, 2♦ does not deny a 4cM so North bids 2♠/2♦
and South gets the contract.

Forgetting for a moment where we should or should not end up, on this hand ---The big idea of inverted minors is to allow room to explore with the better responding hands. This purpose is greatly defeated when we add the possibility of a major-suit contract into the mix. Determining the right level and whether to be in NT or the minor is plenty.

The benefits of inverted minors are even more diluted, if continuations are undiscussed. That jump to 3NT is from another world; any reasonable continuations should involve using the space available to probe for the correct strain and level. One possibility for the jump to 3NT would be to describe a balanced 18-19. This jump to 3NT described nothing other than that the opener wanted to hog the hand as declarer, no matter whether the contract was diamonds or Notrump.

[S2000magic]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-25, 03:04, said:

We try to avoid the inverted 2m on 4-card support, anyway.

Way too many years ago I did an analysis on opening bids in a 5-card-major, better minor (either WNT or SNT) setting. I don't recall the statistics exactly, but I do recall that a 1♦ opener in more likely to be a 4-carder than an 3-carder, and a 1♣ opener is, interestingly, more likely to be a 5-carder than a 3-carder. I, for one, wouldn't think twice about raising 1♦ to 2♦ on 4-card support (as long as the rest of the hand is appropriate).

[aguahombre]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-27, 13:06, said:

Way too many years ago I did an analysis on opening bids in a 5-card-major, better minor (either WNT or SNT) setting. I don't recall the statistics exactly, but I do recall that a 1♦ opener in more likely to be a 4-carder than an 3-carder, and a 1♣ opener is, interestingly, more likely to be a 5-carder than a 3-carder. I, for one, wouldn't think twice about raising 1♦ to 2♦ on 4-card support (as long as the rest of the hand is appropriate).

It is not about the frequency 1m contains more than three. It is about how to handle the auction when partner does have less than four, and prefering to show notrumpish hands by bidding nt even with four-card support for the minor. Oh, and that other little thing: sometimes regardless of partner's number in the suit it is nice for her to know I have 5+.

This is a preference thing, not any dogma on my part.

[phil_20686]

aguahombre, on 2012-February-27, 12:40, said:

The benefits of inverted minors are even more diluted, if continuations are undiscussed. That jump to 3NT is from another world; any reasonable continuations should involve using the space available to probe for the correct strain and level. One possibility for the jump to 3NT would be to describe a balanced 18-19. This jump to 3NT described nothing other than that the opener wanted to hog the hand as declarer, no matter whether the contract was diamonds or Notrump.

The largest benefit of putting hands with a 4cM and longer diamonds into the inverted minor, is that after 1d-1s-1n, I do not have to deal with GF hands with 4s and longer diamonds, which are often tricky. If you think this auction is more overloaded than 1d-2d, then it makes sense to put hands like Axxx x KQTxxx Ax into the inverted minor.

There are also benefits on hands where you have an actual good diamond fit, as opener has more room to describe his hand than is possible after 1d-1m-2d-... and many people have poor continuation structures on this auction.

I prefer a structure where GF hands start of by bidding their longest suit. I dont think the differences are so large that one is clearly better than the other, but if I were pushed I would say that I think bidding inverted minor with hands where diamonds are longer than spades (but not equal length) is beneficial on the whole.