[blml] Hawaii Appeal 4

[Tim West-Meads]

Konrad wrote:
> > 
> > Well it scares me.  If playing 2N as "limit raise or better" then 
> > 3C should be either a LSGT *or* the beginning of a slam try 
> > sequence with values and length in C.  West might hold 
> > Qx,AKTxx,x,AKxxx and 6H is laydown (and given the X of 1H the SQ 
> > isn't really needed).  To me 3D is a not only an LA to 3H but the 
> > blindingly obvious choice.
> > 
> 
> 3H? And then it goes pass, pass, pass... Partner holds
> 
> QJx              Kxx
> KQ10xx           Jxxx
> x                AJx
> KJxx             Q10x
> 
> 
> takes 10 tricks and asks politely after the hand: "you have 
> a fourth trump, you have help in clubs and you say you couldn't
> find any extras in your hand over 3C??"
> 
> Bidding negative 3H over natural and invitational 3C is not blindigly
> obvious. It is blidingly idiotic. 

Your text seems to indicate that we agree (3H barely counts as an LA 
absent the UI) but your tone indicates disagreement with my suggestion 
that 3D is a clear (and unsuggested) LA to 4H.  If one bids 3D and pard 
shows no further interest by bidding 3H one will still raise to 4 (pass 
is still barely an LA) but if pard shows slam interest (e.g. by bidding 
4C) one should co-operate.

Tim