BPO-005D

[han]

Don, I expect that there is no such thing as expert agreement on what 4NT means.

[pigpenz]

Preempts work. You don't have remotely enough space to explore intelligently and its folly to pretend that you do. I'm feeling optimistic today, so I'm bidding 6N and hoping for the best...

that makes it more likely that you would want to make 4NT to play.

 

1NT 2♠ double

1NT 3♠ double

 

likewise

2NT 3major double

 

of these 3 cases i would only play the first as penalty. The last two would fall more into the line as negative doubles. Saying partner we have the points but dont know for sure where we belong. So what do we discuss with partner when we make out a card about these auctions.

 

Now would the opps bid on a hand that they can beat 3nt off the top on? Most good opps wouldnt.

 

so if we have discussed it even an auction like

1nt 4♠ double pass

 

could still be pulled to 4NT but ???

[inquiry]

For the last three hands, Canadian expert Mike Hargreaves joins the panel (and hopefully for all future contest). Welcome Mike.

 

As noted above, 4NT was bid as natural at the table. I didn’t think a natural 4NT was an option here. Neither did a number of the posters (Fred, Justin and Richie for instance). While others thought 4NT was natural, (flytoox and Sergey). Let’s start with the 4NT bidders, as they had so little to say (if natural, I would say “wtp”?)

 

Sergey D. 4N - natural.

 

Flytoox 4N. I think 4N is to play. However this is not very clear. A good discussing point.

 

For those who can’t bid 4NT as natural, the choices were DBL, 5♦ and 6♦. Each bid had some outstanding support.

 

FRED DBL – If I thought 4NT was natural, I would choose that call, but I personally think 4NT *should* be for takeout and I think it is likely that most experts would agree. 5D could easily be right, but it is not unlikely that it will be down on a ruff. Meanwhile, I expect to collect a reasonable penalty most of the time defending 4S doubled. This is a close call, but my judgment suggests that defending is the percentage action. The identity and mannerisms of my RHO would likely influence my decision at the table.

 

Justin Dbl . Very hard hand. 5D could be right, but I will take the sure cash. I would interpret 4N as showing two places to play here, not natural. I'm worried that in 5D they will start with spade-spade ruff, and then 5D may go down. I expect to usually get 300 or 500 with a X which I don't want to jeopardize.

 

Roland Double. 5D doesn't look right. RHO must have 8 spades for his vulnerable leap to 4S without the king, and then the first two tricks will be spade to the ace, spade ruff. Do we have the rest now? Maybe, but then declarer is unlikely to get more than his 7 spade tricks. I will take the money (hopefully 500) instead of a questionable 600.

 

The most popular bid was the “bid what you think you can make” school of 5♦. These players oten worried about the possible ♠A and ♠ ruff. but saw (reasonably) little other choie. I have to admit that I would have gone with 5♦ as well.

 

Beto 5♦. It would be nice if we could know the style of the preemptor. Without much information and in this vul., i bid what i think i can make.

 

MikeH 5♦ LHO may be unable to lead a ♠, or partner may hold the A. 4N is too ambiguous, slam remote, unwilling to defend.

 

Luis 5d: A difficult judgment problem. I don't have many options over 4s so I'mgoing to bid a contract that I know has a play. 6d is an option. Both 3NTand 6d can work on some layouts I think 5d is the best option in average.

 

Fluffy 5♦, even if only 1 ace is missing, it could easilly be ♠A+♠ruff, so 5♦ rates to be our best chancee of scoring high. Sure we can go down, but I don't think 4♠ is more than 300.

 

Reisig I'd play 4NT here as two suited (not natural)...do I have a real choice? 5D

 

Ng: 5♦ The only danger is the spade ruff, but we can still survive this bad luck.

Slam (6D) would be bad contract due for spade ruff, 6NT would be doubtful

and dangerous also, so forget it. Penalty double is not effective here, see

the vulnerability.

 

Then, finally, Henri showed his free spirit again.

 

ritong 6nt i know, i am a wild punter :-) now, assuming overcaller has AQJxxxxx, my part looks at ♠xx, so no way he drives on if i bid 4nt or 5!♦. what could slow me down is the ♥ lead could be killer, but i trust my rho to deduce i hold ♠king and lead ♠ace in any case.

 

This I thought was the most difficult hand of the set. The possibility of the spade ruff is bothersome for 5♦. 4♠X doesn’t look like the road to riches, and 4NT not being natural (for most players) makes bidding it unrealistic (at least to the majority of the panel). There seems to be no “good” answer, anything might work well, or horribly. So really, everyone probably should get the same score no matter what they voted...but here, the panel votes rule.

 

Scores

5♦ 100

DBL 80

4NT 60

6NT 40

[Guest Jlall]

This was a very good problem Ben, kudos for picking it. A good ole fashioned judgement call that also brought into question the meaning of a bid (4N).

[mike777]

Yuck. Ya, 4nt should be 2 suit takeout not natural..never entered my mind, rats.

 

At least I thought 5d was a very close second, via FTL.

[pigpenz]

but that is the point of the problem why does 4NT have to be takeout, unless you have discussed it. There are probably just as many hands where it is right to bid 4NT as takeout as there is to take 4NT to play. The problem points out that at high levels you need to decide which one you want to play. Cause as I had posted earlier most people arent going to bid on a suit that they think they can beat 3nt on.

[Guest Jlall]

I disagree that a natural 4N is as likely to occur as a takeout 4N. First, you need a spade stopper. I agree RHO won't have a solid suit, but it will probably be missing 1 honor, maybe 2. Partner, the 1N bidder, rates to have this, LHO could have it, so it's unlikely that we'll even have a stopper when the auction starts 1N-4S. Then, we need extra values AND a long suit. Obviously we wont have some flat hand, or we could just X. If we have no extras, we can't expect 10 tricks. So it is a very specific and unlikely hand type that can bid a natural 4N, and when you pick it up you will always have 2 reasonable options of X or 5 of your minor.

 

When you hold a 2 suiter like x KJxxx KQxxx xx, you have no reasonable bid when they bid 4S. Can you really X or guess a red suit at the 5 level? For this bid to be effective you need just a distributional hand. You don't even need a hand that EXPECTS to make as you have a 2-way shot possibility on this auction. More compelling, without a 4N bid you have no reasonable options if the auction starts 1N-4S.

 

What 4N should mean undiscussed is an interesting question. To me it feels unnatural to ever have a natural 4N bid at my disposal in a competitive auction if it's not discussed. Others obviously think that it would be unnatural to have an artificial 4N here undiscussed. I would probably never make this bid undiscussed no matter what my hand was since it seems too disaster prone.

[pigpenz]

thats the point of the problem :)

 

If you run the hand through a simulator and startlooking at the results that are possible, the points in partners hand that let 5♦ make are usually the same ones that let 4NT make. The only difference that 5♦ is more prone to a second round spade ruff.

 

So now I need to run the south west hands through a simulator and see what comes up with the north hand. Hands more likely to be able to play 4nt or hands more suited to use 4nt as a two suited takeout. Will let you know when i get a couple of hundred hands done ;)

[inquiry]

thats the point of the problem :)

At the table, the player with this hand bid a natural 4NT. I didn't think that bid was possible without expressed agreement (in otherwords, I thought expert opinion would be, if undiscussed 4NT would be two places to play --- by the way, this does not exclude hearts as one of the two places).

 

I think the poll clearly indicates that, indeed, experts play it this way. See comments by,

 

Fred, Justin, and rich. Roland while not addressing this question was hoping for all the tricks in diamonds after ♠A and ♠ ruff, so it is clear he thinks 4NT is not natural as well. I think most of the 5♦ and all the Doublers would bid 4NT if they believed it to be natural.

 

Of course it would be great if it was legal to bid 4NT and add the words "to play" to it... if only the rules would let you!!!

[han]

Pigpenz,

 

You say good opponents won't bid 4S on 7 pr 8 solid spades or KQJ-8th and a side ace, because they can beat 3NT. I don't buy this. How likely is it that the opponents will land in 3NT? I think that it is much more likely that the opponents find their heart fit, and a later 4S bid over 4H won't have quite the same effect.

[Walddk]

I agree that 4NT should be two places to play. Opener will treat it as minors. With diamonds and hearts responder will correct 5♣ to 5♦, with clubs and hearts, he will pull 5♦ to 5♥.

 

How many have the agreement that 4NT is natural on this auction? My guess is very few.

 

Roland

[luis]

Do you want to have some fun?

 

Yesterday my pd and I played f2f bridge against one of our internationalist pairs, in fact a pair that will play the bermuda bowl for our country in October.

 

The following auction occurred:

 

me Int1 pd Int2

3♠ - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT

 

At this point Int2 in my side of the screen told in a loud voice "This is uniscussed" without even alerting or anything.

I raised an eyebrow, bid pass and passed the tray.

 

me Int1 pd Int2

pass - 5♦ - pass - 5♥

 

In his side of the screen pd asked Internationalist number 1 about the 5♦ bid, the conversation was:

Pd: "What id 5♦?"

Int1: "Depends on what 4NT is"

Pd: "And what is 4NT?"

Int1: "Can be blackwood or two suiter"

Pd: "And which one it is?"

Int1: "I don't know"

Pd: "And how can you then bid 5♦?"

Int1: "....."

Pd: "Please tell me"

Int1: "....."

 

The hand ended in 5♥ making, I felt abused and insulted for both the behavious and the incredible explanations.

Up to now I can't determine if they are short of grey matter and really think what they explained or if they are just bad people trying to confuse opponents.

[Guest Jlall]

OK...I'll bite...what was wrong with the explanations? If 4N is undiscussed then 5D is obviously not systemic. He even told you the 2 possible meanings of 4N, but he wasn't sure which. Why was this wrong?

[luis]

OK...I'll bite...what was wrong with the explanations? If 4N is undiscussed then 5D is obviously not systemic. He even told you the 2 possible meanings of 4N, but he wasn't sure which. Why was this wrong?

First of all because it's not ethical to announce "Undiscussed" out loud.

The second problem was that 5♦ was alerted.

Then I think you can't bid 5♦ and alert without telling pd if you are answering blackwood or picking your best minor. The explanation "depends on what 4NT is" doesn't make any sense. I mean if you don't know what 4NT is and pd doesn't know what 5♦ is what the hell is going on ?

[Guest Jlall]

OK...I'll bite...what was wrong with the explanations? If 4N is undiscussed then 5D is obviously not systemic. He even told you the 2 possible meanings of 4N, but he wasn't sure which. Why was this wrong?

First of all because it's not ethical to announce "Undiscussed" out loud.

The second problem was that 5♦ was alerted.

Then I think you can't bid 5♦ and alert without telling pd if you are answering blackwood or picking your best minor. The explanation "depends on what 4NT is" doesn't make any sense. I mean if you don't know what 4NT is and pd doesn't know what 5♦ is what the hell is going on ?

I agree, he should not talk out loud. I am talking about the actual explanations given, though which you characterize as "incredible."

 

The explanation "depends on what 4N is" was perhaps worded poorly, but I see nothing wrong with it. He could say "undiscussed" but he gave you more information than he was required to, basically that it was either an answer to keycard or pickign his better minor. That is why he said "depends on what 4N is" presumably. As for "what the hell is going on?" they don't know! Why should you be able to know if they are in uncharted territory and don't know whats going on. In fact your partner's screenmate told you all the options of what MIGHT be going on. This is VERY ethical to me, as opposed to just saying everything is undiscussed.

 

I don't understand your problem here with all that happened, other than your screenmate talking out loud (which you did not call the director on immediately, btw). You really have a problem with alerting 5D? Did doing this damage your side? He was alerting a bid that could potentially be artificial. If I forget our defense to 1N, and the auction goes 1N-2C but I knew it was either DONT or CAPP and the tray came back to me, I would alert. When asked, I would say I forgot, but its either C+higher or capp. I would not just not alert.

[mikeh]

Luis, obviously we all agree that it was wrong to announce 'undiscussed' over the 4N.

 

But I am with Justin in wondering why you are upset at the explanation of the 5♦ bid.

 

To me, the outcome of this hand depends on the hand held by the 4N bidder. If he had both minors and dubious ♥, it seems likely that he intended 4N as takeout and then catered to his partner's possible keycard response. I would, as committee or director, at least strongly consider making them play in 5♦.

 

Also, if responder's hand makes it clear that he intended 4N as keycard, I would want to know what a 5♦ keycard response would show. Let's assume, for example, that they play 1430. Now 5♦ shows 3 keycards. If overcaller held only 2, and 3 would suggest slam, I might force the 4N bidder to bid 6♥ (unless it made :) ).

 

The problem does not lie in the explanation of 5♦ but in the unauthorized information contained in the 'undiscussed' announcement.

[pigpenz]

thats the point of the problem :)

At the table, the player with this hand bid a natural 4NT. I didn't think that bid was possible without expressed agreement (in otherwords, I thought expert opinion would be, if undiscussed 4NT would be two places to play --- by the way, this does not exclude hearts as one of the two places).

 

I think the poll clearly indicates that, indeed, experts play it this way. See comments by,

 

Fred, Justin, and rich. Roland while not addressing this question was hoping for all the tricks in diamonds after ♠A and ♠ ruff, so it is clear he thinks 4NT is not natural as well. I think most of the 5♦ and all the Doublers would bid 4NT if they believed it to be natural.

 

Of course it would be great if it was legal to bid 4NT and add the words "to play" to it... if only the rules would let you!!!

i am watching hands spin by on the simulator as DF looks at them, and am thinking if 4NT is takeout what type of hands do we want partner to bid 4NT on? Do we want partner do bid on 5-4 hands 6-4 hands only 5-5 or what?

 

I think it has brought up an interesting point!

What do we expect partner to have for his 4NT call? If that call is made.

Are the odds better on an auction like this that parnter is more likely to be one suited vs two suited?

[Guest Jlall]

What do we expect partner to have for his 4NT call? If that call is made.

I would expect 5-5 or better usually.

[Dinos1]

Reisig I'd play 4NT here as two suited (not natural)...do I have a real choice? 5D

If 4N is 2-suited what then 5m bid means? 1-suited? Isn't better to reverse these meanings? Then 4N is to play WITH LONG MINOR. It's quite natural 'cause with balanced hand I would simply double! So - if 4N shows long minor then 2-suited hands can be described with bids: 5♣ - ♣ + higher suit, 5♦ - ♦ + ♥.

And this hand shows which treatment is better.

Different situation is after 1♥ - (4♠) - ? Here 4N is for t/o - either minor+fit or both minors (and short spades in both cases).

 

Sergey.

[flytoox]

Reisig I'd play 4NT here as two suited (not natural)...do I have a real choice? 5D

If 4N is 2-suited what then 5m bid means? 1-suited? Isn't better to reverse these meanings? Then 4N is to play WITH LONG MINOR. It's quite natural 'cause with balanced hand I would simply double! So - if 4N shows long minor then 2-suited hands can be described with bids: 5♣ - ♣ + higher suit, 5♦ - ♦ + ♥.

And this hand shows which treatment is better.

Different situation is after 1♥ - (4♠) - ? Here 4N is for t/o - either minor+fit or both minors (and short spades in both cases).

 

Sergey.

Hehe, I like this logic.

[pigpenz]

yes thats what i am getting out looking at hands, 4nt still gives you some chance of playing 4NT by saying i have a single suited hand, if its two suited then when cant be bidding 4NT on 6-4 or 5-4 hands or we are the ones who will go for numbers. It almost like we need to come up with a quasi lebensol method of bidding over 4 bids over our 1NT openings.

 

any ideas from anyone else.

 

what the solvers forum does is give us a chance to build a better mousetrap.

[Fluffy]

What about the ♠ stopper? do you always have 1?

[pigpenz]

I keep thinking about this problem alot...and I almost feel like there has to be a better way to bid this so that at least you have a shot of getting to 4NT......maybe along the lines of some form of lebensol...

 

maybe 4NT should start a relay to 5♣ so show some form of single suited hand and direct bids of 5 show a better hand almost slam invitational or vice a versa, and then play double as cooperative.

 

The reason I was thinking of this is it more likely to be one suited or two suited.

[Dinos1]

What about the ♠ stopper? do you always have 1?

You have better solution than the one suggested? :o

There was high-level preemptive bid after all, and you just can't bid perfectly all the hands. So opener has to guess if he has no ♠ stopper - to pass or to bid 5♣ as P/C. Visualization of partner's probable hands will help in making decision.

 

Sergey.

[JLOGIC]

Agree with myself that 4N is not natural. I discuss this one with my partners too, I guess because of this thread! Thanks BBF.