MFA Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 2S. Range probe. Pd bids her 4 card suits up the line with a max. Isn't it bad to start showing suits when you should have a normal 1n-2n-3n sequence? 4NT for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 4NT, but just. Partner's allowed to have a 5cd suit. Really don't like 4333s though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 2S. Range probe. Pd bids her 4 card suits up the line with a max. Isn't it bad to start showing suits when you should have a normal 1n-2n-3n sequence? 4NT for me. Why? This doesn't make sense; if partner has a max I am going to look for 6C. If she has a minimum she will simply bid 3NT, Wtp? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 2S. Range probe. Pd bids her 4 card suits up the line with a max. Isn't it bad to start showing suits when you should have a normal 1n-2n-3n sequence? 4NT for me. Why? This doesn't make sense; if partner has a max I am going to look for 6C. If she has a minimum she will simply bid 3NT, Wtp? But, when you have a normal 3NT invite (rather than the slam invite) and opener accepts the invitation, you unnecessarily give away distributional information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 I got the impression he was talking about this hand, Tim. Otherwise I would suggest that a Baron 2S gains more than it loses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted March 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 [hv=n=sakqh932dq54ckq96&s=s732ha7dak83caj82]133|200|[/hv] On this hand, my table produced the auction 1N - 4N. At the other table, the auction went 1N - 3N. Both declarers made 6 when the Diamonds broke. Neither table sniffed arround for a minor suit slam. Both pairs missed a good 6♣. (My partner likes 4 way transfers, so we didn't have minor suit stayman or Baron on any thing like that) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 1N-4N; 5C-6C seems pretty routine once you decide to invite. I predict a series of posts saying that opener has a super obvious accept over 4N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 1N-4N; 5C-6C seems pretty routine once you decide to invite. If so, then with 732 AJ82 AK83 A7 opposite AKQ 932 Q54 KQ96, I assume it would be equally routine to bid 1NT-4NT; 5♦-6NT. The existence of a 4-4 fit is likely to be worth at least one trick. Is the five level really the right place to be doing this sort of investigation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 I know that 5 Club shows a FIVE card suit but it is new to me to make this with a 4 card suit.With the given methods I had bid 1 NT 4 NT 5 NT and played there.(And if pd takes 5 NT as pick a slam, I had been in 6 Club, nice misunderstanding) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 I know that 5 Club shows a FIVE card suit but it is new to me to make this with a 4 card suit. Maybe 5♣ = 4 card suit6♣ = 5 card suit :D Incidently, slam is good in clubs. It's bad in NT. Anyway, without a gadget to dig up the 44 fit, 3NT is the contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 1N-4N; 5C-6C seems pretty routine once you decide to invite. If so, then with 732 AJ82 AK83 A7 opposite AKQ 932 Q54 KQ96, I assume it would be equally routine to bid 1NT-4NT; 5♦-6NT. The existence of a 4-4 fit is likely to be worth at least one trick. Is the five level really the right place to be doing this sort of investigation? As I said earlier in the thread, I have no problem with either 3NT or 4NT by responder -- I think it is close. I don't think opener has a close decision whether to pass or accept over 4NT. Yes, I would prefer methods that allowed for discovery over a 44 minor suit fit before the partnership gets past 4N. To Codo's suggestion that 5C shows a five-card suit: I disagree. I think standard is that a new suit at the five-level is a four-card suit and a new suit at the six-level is a five-card suit. (I also believe that any move over 4NT accepts the invitation, so stopping at the five-level is not an option.) As I just said, I'd like to be playing methods that allowed for some investigation below 4NT, but absent that, I think these are "standard". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 If North invites, I think I prefer 5N by south. This seems to get the minors in but doesn't over-commit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 South has a clear 5C bid over 4NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 1N-4N; 5C-6C seems pretty routine once you decide to invite. If so, then with 732 AJ82 AK83 A7 opposite AKQ 932 Q54 KQ96, I assume it would be equally routine to bid 1NT-4NT; 5♦-6NT. The existence of a 4-4 fit is likely to be worth at least one trick. Is the five level really the right place to be doing this sort of investigation? Of course it is. Given your example hand, over 5♦ responder should bid 5N, which would be an excellent description of his hand. Opener should pass 5N then, which will usually make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 South has a clear 5C bid over 4NT. ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Over the past few weeks I've seen several suggestions for constructive auctions that end in 5NT. This is an area of the game that I seem to have missed out on. I don't think I've ever played in a freely-bid 5NT, and I don't want to. Even though my teammates have learned to expect a sprinkling of bizarre results, I'm not keen on finding out how they'd react to 5NT-1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 To Codo's suggestion that 5C shows a five-card suit: I disagree. I think standard is that a new suit at the five-level is a four-card suit and a new suit at the six-level is a five-card suit. (I also believe that any move over 4NT accepts the invitation, so stopping at the five-level is not an option.) As I just said, I'd like to be playing methods that allowed for some investigation below 4NT, but absent that, I think these are "standard".Strongly disagree (with you too han!) (and you too inquiry!) (and you too cherdano!) They both show five card suits but 6♣ shows a better one. It is important to distinguish ATxxx from KQTxx lest poor pard be sitting there with Jxx. In fact showing a weaker five card suit allows you to stop in 5NT as well when partner fits it very badly. To look for 4-4 fits just bid 5NT over 4NT and baron away. I don't believe anything is actually standard (in fact in the general bridge playing community, among players who don't think 4NT is blackwood and who would ever bid anything but pass or 6NT, I'm sure answering aces if you have a max is "standard", as bad as it is) but I'm quite sure what I just said is best, at least among practical solutions. I do believe south has a very clear acceptance via 5NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Strongly disagree (with you too han!) (and you too inquiry!) (and you too cherdano!) They both show five card suits but 6♣ shows a better one. I wonder if either of us can find reference to this in the bridge literature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Fine Josh, if your method is clearly superior I believe you. It is not what I have played so far so I'd bid 5C showing 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Strongly disagree (with you too han!) (and you too inquiry!) (and you too cherdano!) They both show five card suits but 6♣ shows a better one. I wonder if either of us can find reference to this in the bridge literature. I'm fairly sure Marshall Miles touched on it in his recent book on constructive bidding. Maybe I'll look in my copy tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 You can still distinguish between a good and bad 5-card suit by jumping with the good suit and rebidding the suit with the bad suit. IMO it is useful to bid 4-card suits and still be able to stop in 5N but I won't argue with someone averaging +8 IMPs when playing 5N.* *Anyone up for verifying Josh's claim via BridgeBrowser? Then I could continue arguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Strongly disagree (with you too han!) (and you too inquiry!) (and you too cherdano!) They both show five card suits but 6♣ shows a better one. I wonder if either of us can find reference to this in the bridge literature. I'm fairly sure Marshall Miles touched on it in his recent book on constructive bidding. Maybe I'll look in my copy tonight. I looked through some books this afternoon, couldn't find any mention of bidding after a qualitative 4NT. The Bidding Dictionary seems to stop at 4S. I have lots of old standards, even Stayman's "Do You Play Stayman" in which he gives a scheme for showing exact point count after 1N -- 1N-4N = 16, 1N-2C-2x-4N = 17, 1N-5N = 18, 1N-2C-2x-5N = 19...or something like that -- but no mention of suit follow-ups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Over the past few weeks I've seen several suggestions for constructive auctions that end in 5NT. This is an area of the game that I seem to have missed out on. I don't think I've ever played in a freely-bid 5NT, and I don't want to. Even though my teammates have learned to expect a sprinkling of bizarre results, I'm not keen on finding out how they'd react to 5NT-1. Its better than 6NT -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 Some form of CONFI (or CONFIT) would help here - but that seems to be out of favour. With marginal slam hands we are usually much better playing in a suit if we have a fit. So it makes sense to have some method to finding a 4=4 minor fit and at least invite slam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 12, 2008 Report Share Posted March 12, 2008 I've found one reference: KS Updated. In the responses to 1NT section it lists 4NT: "quantitative; if accept, bid suits up the line." It makes no mention of whether suits at the five-level are 4-card or 5-card suits, but "suits up the line" suggests four-card suit to me. I think the "if accept" part means that any move over 4NT accepts the invitation. I'm not suggestion K-S is standard, it's just the only reference I can find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.