[Caitlynne]

Though I know there are many variations of multi - it is not like there is a widely recognized standard - I do think that you must bid 2H unless you think you have enough for the artificial force of 2NT. After all, as I understand the multi response structure, a bid of any number of spades guarantees 3 card heart support.

I don't think you do have enough for 2NT. So I would bid 2H. If this gets passed out, it might work out. If it gets doubled, I will run to 2S which, as I understand, is a command for partner to Pass for the remainder of the auction.

[mr1303]

2H for me. Hating it, but 2S will get me too high.

[helene_t]

 Caitlynne, on 2016-July-28, 07:50, said:

Though I know there are many variations of multi - it is not like there is a widely recognized standard - I do think that you must bid 2H unless you think you have enough for the artificial force of 2NT. After all, as I understand the multi response structure, a bid of any number of spades guarantees 3 card heart support.

This is not necesarily so - you can also bid 2♠ with 1-2 in the majors and a good hand, or maybe by agreement with spades only (but, as manudude says, this should be a hand with at least invitational strength probably), or maybe you have agreed that it cal also be a weak hand with long clubs and tolerance for spades but not for hearts.

In any case, bidding 2♠ will take you past 2♠ while pass or 2♥ will allow you to bid 2♠ after they double you. It is of course possible that 3♠ (doubled or not) is better than 2♥ undoubled, but the risk that p misunderstands 2♠ followed by 3♠, plus the chance that opps will save us from 2♥, makes me to bid 2♥ also. It is also possible that 2♥ is not a bad contract.

As for pass, I think the hand is too good. 2♦-4 is a bad result if opps can't make anything.

[Jinksy]

 helene_t, on 2016-July-28, 00:46, said:

2S is possible if you have the agreement that 2♠ followed by 3♠ is to play. This is a sensible agreement. At least, you need to have some way to bid a hand like this, and 2♥ or pass are not satisfactory.

Even if I have that agreement, I'm bidding 2♥. Bidding 2 then 3 spades is a 'come double me' auction, and my spade suit is nowhere near robust enough for that. I'm much more interested in playing undoubled than getting to the best partscore.

[661_Pete]

 The_Badger, on 2016-July-28, 03:39, said:

maybe a return of -0.33 IMPs was a bit of an unfair result.

I've given up labelling any sort of IMPs result on BBO as 'unfair'.

Far too often I've made what I consider a 'good' game, only to bag a negative IMP score. Trouble is, some oaf at another table will have made a monstrous sacrifice, doubled and going umpteen down, and that simply distorts the figures. I can't force my opponents to sacrifice....!

Anyway, back to the OP: for those who can't be bothered to seek out the actual board on BBO, here are the E-W hands:

---

As you've probably guessed, W passed and 2♦ was the final contract. Trumps broke 4-3 but they still went down -4. An IMPs score of -0.33 looks reasonable to me. If I'd been playing, it would have ended up at -15 or thereabouts....

[Zelandakh]

 661_Pete, on 2016-July-28, 10:19, said:

An IMPs score of -0.33 looks reasonable to me. If I'd been playing, it would have ended up at -15 or thereabouts....

Indeed, clearly the only reason you have a negative IMP score is because of the continuous bad luck that follows you around. It is really a shame that the luck in bridge never evens itself out. Otherwise it might even be a half decent game.

[shyams]

Upon reading 661_Pete's post, I looked at the played board on BBO.

East (wackojack) bid 2♦ and alerted it as "Weak M or strong m". Given the strong minor option, I would not have passed, instead bidding 2♥. If the agreement for 2♦ was "weak long Major" only, I think a pass is not all that risky.

[661_Pete]

 Zelandakh, on 2016-July-28, 10:39, said:

Indeed, clearly the only reason you have a negative IMP score is because of the continuous bad luck that follows you around. It is really a shame that the luck in bridge never evens itself out. Otherwise it might even be a half decent game.

Indeed, either you have been kibbing all my chatlines, or you realise by now that my middle name is 'Karapet'. Although I am not aware of having any Armenian blood, it's a dead cert that I must be his own twin brother .

Having said that, I notice that my IMPs monthly average has just nudged its way back 'into the black', thanks to some lucky breaks in this afternoon's session. It can't last!

[GrahamJson]

The only option here is 2H, and hope that oppo come to your rescue. If you were stronger you could consider 3S, which I believe should show a hand like this; good spades, heart shortage and invitational (you bid 2NT first with a stronger hand). I think this is a butter usage for the bid than pass or correct.

[Zelandakh]

 661_Pete, on 2016-July-28, 12:23, said:

Having said that, I notice that my IMPs monthly average has just nudged its way back 'into the black', thanks to some lucky breaks in this afternoon's session. It can't last!

It is fate trying to fool you into thinking you have a realistic chance before swiping it away from you with some catastrophic bad luck in a few hands' time.

[Jinksy]

 shyams, on 2016-July-28, 11:50, said:

East (wackojack) bid 2♦ and alerted it as "Weak M or strong m". Given the strong minor option, I would not have passed, instead bidding 2♥. If the agreement for 2♦ was "weak long Major" only, I think a pass is not all that risky.

Maybe not 'risky', but it rates to be a worse part score than 2♥ - partner must be odds-against to have 4+ diamonds, and sometimes even with 4, the hand will play better with the long suit as trumps.

[Tramticket]

 jogs, on 2016-July-28, 07:18, said:

You're right. Not allowed to play multi in most ACBL events.

- Pity, it's a great convention

[Jinksy]

 Tramticket, on 2016-July-29, 04:43, said:

- Pity, it's a great convention

Almost as good as a weak 2♦