When is 4NT natural?

[elwood913]

Hi,

 

We're trying to set some rules/guidelines for when 4NT should be natural. I have in mind auctions where we're bidding a bunch of suits without having found a fit. Either we get to the point where somebody wants to bid 4NT to play over 4m, or somebody wants to jump to 4NT quantitative (not blackwwod).

 

Something like,

1♠-2♥/

3♣-3♦...

 

If you are the opener and now want to play NT but 3NT isn't enough can you bid 4NT here, natural and quantitative?

What if respoder wnats to bid NT naturally after opener repeats one of his suits?

 

This is just an example, don't want to get too tied up in the specifics of this sequence, but looking for some general ideas. So far we've come up with something like "If we've bid all four suits naturally with no raise then either pd at their next bid can bid 4NT natural..." But we hope we can come up with something better or more than that...

 

The main problem we're trying to solve is when one or both of us are bidding around like fools, trying to scrape up forcing bids because we're afraid to bid 4NT for fear (or knowing) it won't have the meaning we intend. Maybe we've bid all the suits, maybe we haven't. Eventually we're stuck bidding 3NT when we don't want to end the auction, or 4NT when it's likely to be taken as blackwood, not quantitative (or vice versa, we want to ask for aces but fear this is the time pd will assume we're bidding naturally).

 

In other words we're tying to get away from the beginner practice of "4NT is blackwood uber alles " to something a little more flexible, but don't really know where to start.

 

(We're playing St. American, not 2/1. Responder's 2nd round jumps are GF and 4SF is 1 round force, if it matters.)

 

Thanks,

Bill

[helene_t]

4NT is to play when:

 

- One partner bids 3NT, the other bids 4m as natural slam invite, the 3NT-bidder now declines with 4NT.

 

- After we failed to find a fit with a Baron-sequence, e.g.

2♣-2♦

3NT-4♣*

4♠-4NT

 

- Opps bid over our 3NT, e.g.

3♣-(p)-3NT-(4♠)

p-(p)-4NT

 

- Probably over a natural 4m preempt from opps (or a natural 4m preempt from partner as well, I suppose).

 

I probably missed some additional situations.

[Finch]

It's a good discussion for a serious partnership to have (by serious I just mean any partnership that wants to play together a lot). There are four different ways to approach this:

 

i) 4NT is always Blackwood, except for some specific cases we are going to define

ii) 4NT is never Blackwood, except for some specific cases we are going to define

iii) In {this generic set of auctions} 4NT is RKCB, in {this generic set of auctions} it isn't

iv) We are going to try and define all sequences to 4NT (at least in some generic sense) and decide what 4NT means on all of them.

 

My partnerships-with-detailed-system-files started with version (ii) and have progressed to version (iii). But we play 4NT as blackwood a LOT less than most people, including many world class players, seem to.

 

Here's a slightly simplified version of our rules. You might find these a bit too anti-Blackwood for your liking, but take them as something to think about.

 

4NT is not RKCB, unless

i) We have explicitly agreed a major suit (either by raising to show support, or cueing in support), or have jumped to 4NT opposite a major suit pre-empt.

ii) We have agreed a major suit by inference and it is not possible to agree it explicitly

iii) We have explicitly agreed a minor suit and 4NT was a jump (and it's not one of our agreed kickback auctions)

iv) Exception: some jumps to 4NT are obviously RKCB even when they aren't defined as such by the above

 

Special auctions: 4NT response to a 1-level opening bid is asking for aces only; 4NT opening asks for specific aces.

 

The problem is that in order for these rules to work, you have to have very firm agreements about other auctions, as they depend on knowing if it was possible to agree a major suit explicitly or not.

 

For example, after 1NT - 2C - 2S, do you have a way to explicitly agree spades? If yes, then 4NT is natural; if not then it is RKCB for spades.

 

Or

 

1S - 2C

2H - 3D (4th suit forcing the way we play)

3H -

 

for us, 4D over 3H would agree hearts, so 4NT is natural. But if for you all suit bids would be natural here, then 4NT is keycard for hearts.

 

Or

 

1H - 2C

3H -

 

for us, 3S artificially agrees hearts, so 4NT is natural. But if for you the jump rebid has defined hearts as trumps then 4NT would be keycard for hearts.

 

Example of rule (ii) would be

1S - 2H

3D - 4C (whatever it means)

4H - 4NT

 

is RKCB for hearts. If responder wanted to bid 4NT natural he could have done so over 3D.

 

A typical example of the exceptions is when the 4NT bidder can bid NT in a natural and forcing manner at a lower level. So , say, 1S - 2H - 4NT is RKCB for hearts (even though technically you are supposed to agree hearts explicitly first). Or 2C - 2S - 4NT is RKCB for spades (why beat around the bush?).

 

4NT in contested auctions is harder because there are lots of other possible meanings.

[Finch]

I want to make a different point, which is only tangentially related to this particular discussion.

 

One of the things that differentiates a partnership with really solid partnership understandings from one that's just guessing, is the idea that whatever order partner decides to make his bids in, that means something, and you can infer that partner chose that order for a reason.

 

In the 4NT examples I was giving, we differentiate between (let's say)

 

1H - 2C

2S - 4NT

 

and

 

1H - 2C

2S - 3S

4any - 4NT

 

(reverse game forcing after a 2/1)

 

the first is natural, the second is RKCB. ON the first, responder could have agreed spades in a forcing manner before bidding 4NT but didn't, therefore 4NT does not agree spades.

 

Similarly, we don't formally play any form of exclusion, but if we had this auction:

 

1S - 4C (splinter)

4S - 4NT

 

that would be exclusion in clubs. Why? Because if responder wanted to RKCB for spades he could have agreed spades in some forcing manner and then bid 4NT while here he deliberately showed a club shortage, learnt nothing new from partner, and decided to ask for aces anyway. He must have had a reason to do that, and the only reason was to focus our attention on the club shortage.

 

So on every auction, when you want to know what partner's trying to show, there's always the thought 'how else could partner have bid his hand' until you reach the hand(s) that partner could only have shown by bidding the way he has chosen to.

[NickRW]

We threw Blackwood on the scrap heap - seemed to be too many possible situations where it provided an apparent route to slam and actually didn't tell you what you wanted to know. We go , simply take a bash, quantative, or cue bid Roman style and have recycled 4N and 5N in a cue bidding sequence as showing a trump honour.

 

It isn't perfect, but completely does away with the "is it blacky" rubbish. And it certainly makes each partner visualise possible holdings for partner - which is actually a good thing.

 

I don't know what the allure of Blackwood is. It is probably, along with Stayman, the most common convention on people's cards, but it just doesn't tell you what you need to know all too often.

 

Why do people hang on to this dinosaur?

 

Nick

[Finch]

We threw Blackwood on the scrap heap - seemed to be too many possible situations where it provided an apparent route to slam and actually didn't tell you what you wanted to know. We go , simply take a bash, quantative, or cue bid Roman style and have recycled 4N and 5N in a cue bidding sequence as showing a trump honour.

 

It isn't perfect, but completely does away with the "is it blacky" rubbish. And it certainly makes each partner visualise possible holdings for partner - which is actually a good thing.

You haven't really solved the problem here.

 

You still have to know whether 4NT is quantitative or a trump cue. So you still have to know if you have agreed a suit or not.

[Rossoneri]

We threw Blackwood on the scrap heap - seemed to be too many possible situations where it provided an apparent route to slam and actually didn't tell you what you wanted to know.  We go , simply take a bash, quantative, or cue bid Roman style and have recycled 4N and 5N in a cue bidding sequence as showing a trump honour.

 

It isn't perfect, but completely does away with the "is it blacky" rubbish.  And it certainly makes each partner visualise possible holdings for partner - which is actually a good thing.

You haven't really solved the problem here.

 

You still have to know whether 4NT is quantitative or a trump cue. So you still have to know if you have agreed a suit or not.

Same applies if you want to use Turbo.

[kfay]

Hijack Alert!!! (semi)

 

Playing 2/1

 

1♠-2♣

2♠-4NT

 

Keycard for clubs? Or quantitative?

 

(I include these two options because responder can agree ♠ then bid 4NT)

[andy_h]

It's a good discussion for a serious partnership to have (by serious I just mean any partnership that wants to play together a lot). There are four different ways to approach this:

 

i) 4NT is always Blackwood, except for some specific cases we are going to define

ii) 4NT is never Blackwood, except for some specific cases we are going to define

iii) In {this generic set of auctions} 4NT is RKCB, in {this generic set of auctions} it isn't

iv) We are going to try and define all sequences to 4NT (at least in some generic sense) and decide what 4NT means on all of them.

This is certainly the way to go about it. Key point is discussion, so you know when it applies or not. (Like one of the examples Frances gave, a suit needs to be agreed, or if no suit was agreed you'd know what sequence a or b, etc means)

[NickRW]

You haven't really solved the problem here.

 

You still have to know whether 4NT is quantitative or a trump cue. So you still have to know if you have agreed a suit or not.

I agree in principle you're correct. In practice its rarely a problem - most often someone has cued before 4N - in which case 4N is never quantative the way we play it. And no trump used quantatively is used as a raise of partner.

 

I agree this doesn't cover every conceivable situation - but I'm working with my kids as partners who have under a years experience - too much detail short circuits their thinking circuitry

 

Nick

[helene_t]

Hijack Alert!!! (semi)

 

Playing 2/1

 

1♠-2♣

2♠-4NT

 

Keycard for clubs? Or quantitative?

 

(I include these two options because responder can agree ♠ then bid 4NT)

Probably RKC for spades since that is the last-mentioned suit. OTOH a hand that would make this bid would always be interested in ♣K but not necessarily in ♠K.

 

Or maybe 6-ace blacky with both black kings counting.

 

But such a 4NT bid would rarely be used no matter what it means.

[Finch]

Hijack Alert!!! (semi)

 

Playing 2/1

 

1♠-2♣

2♠-4NT

 

Keycard for clubs? Or quantitative?

 

(I include these two options because responder can agree ♠ then bid 4NT)

Keycard for spades under by rule (iv) exception.

 

Given responder can

- bid NT in a forcing manner (at the 2-level)

- bid clubs in a forcing manner (at the 3- or 4-level)

- bid spades in a forcing manner (at the 3-level)

 

4NT isn't needed for any of the obvious purposes.

 

So it comes under the 'simplicity' exception. But if you were worried partner would misinterpret you wouldn't do it (at the table I probably wouldn't do it because it might confuse parter).

[neilkaz]

This is B/I ! Now this response doesn't answer the OP's question but I've played 4NT is ALWAYS Blackwood with a few casual pickup-type pards and probably done as well as trying to mutually guess when it might mean something else, since they'd expect to forget.

 

KISS is good here. (by Blackwood I mean what ever kind you play)

 

For me 4NT is Blackwood unless it is obviously Quant or Unusual

 

One useful and standard, as posted many places, rule is the Jacoby followed by 4NT is quant and Texas followed by 4NT is Blackwood (RKCB best here almost certainly)

 

2NT-4NT quant = duh

 

But something like 1♦-2♣(GF)-2NT-3NT-4NT (showing opener has 18-19 flat ie intending to jump rebid 2NT vs a 1M response) may confuse a random pickup or casual B/I unless discussed.

 

1♠-2♦GF-2NT-3♣-4NT(18-19) may confuse most non experts (I mean real ones, rather than those who guessed a two way play for the Queen today) outside of serious partnership.

 

So be cautious with any 4NT bids intend as quant that pd may misunderstand, and for those B/I hopefully working towards serious partnerships, discuss w/pd !

 

http://www.pattayabridge.com/NTbidding_main.htm is a link I found to a whole online book about Strong NT bidding.

[NickRW]

http://www.pattayabridge.com/NTbidding_main.htm is a link I found to a whole online book about Strong NT bidding.

I'd say there is some good beginner/intermediate advice on that site. The club seems to have a mixture of Americans and Brits playing there so some good bits and pieces of advice for folks both sides of the pond too. You won't agree with everything, but the advice is well enough reasoned.

 

Nick