3NT with one suit wide open

[el mister]

How do you weigh risk for a 3NT bid when you think one of your suits may be weak? I've brought a few dodgy 3NT contracts home recently, against the rest of the field. I'm wondering if this is because I play acol, which often seems to put you against the field on BBO for NT, or another reason :P

 

Boards rotated so that I'm south throughout. I can't remember the leads, unfortunately. The wrong ones I guess. What do you think of bidding 3NT? Is the right lead for the defence obvious? Contract was top board in each case.

 

 

[hv=d=s&v=a&n=sq5hq42dkq98cj852&s=s92hkj05d64cakq103]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♣, X, 2♣, P

2♦, X, 3♦, P

3NT, all pass

 

3♦ by pard was a mis-bid, to show ♦ stop. Should have bid 3NT directly in our agreement, but I got what pard meant.[/hv]

3NT+1 for 13.07IMPs

 

 

[hv=d=s&v=a&n=sq5hq42dkq98cj852&s=s92hkj05d64cakq103]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♣, X, 2♣, P

2♦, X, 3♦, P

3NT, all pass

 

3♦ by pard was a mis-bid, to show ♦ stop. Should have bid 3NT directly in our agreement, but I got what pard meant.[/hv]

3NT+1 for 12.73IMPs

I recall the lead on this one. West held AKx♣ and lead the A. Then switched to a ♥ :huh:

 

 

 

[hv=d=s&v=a&n=sq5hq42dkq98cj852&s=s92hkj05d64cakq103]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♣, X, 2♣, P

2♦, X, 3♦, P

3NT, all pass

 

3♦ by pard was a mis-bid, to show ♦ stop. Should have bid 3NT directly in our agreement, but I got what pard meant.[/hv]

3NT+1 for 10.67IMPs

 

The bidding on this next one was a bit of a shambles (can explain if anyone is interested). Not completely against the field, either. A few others in 3NT.

[hv=d=s&v=a&n=sq5hq42dkq98cj852&s=s92hkj05d64cakq103]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1♣, X, 2♣, P

2♦, X, 3♦, P

3NT, all pass

 

3♦ by pard was a mis-bid, to show ♦ stop. Should have bid 3NT directly in our agreement, but I got what pard meant.[/hv]

5NT+1 for 11.40IMPs

[Trumpace]

Assuming ACOL is similar to SAYC... (If not, please ignore)

 

Frankly, I think you are playing in a bad field and got lucky to gain IMPS.

 

On Hand 1, if 2♣ bid is unlimited (like inverted minors), then you either bid 2♥ or 3♣ if 2♥ will be construed a reverse. What was 2♦? If 2♣ is limited, you should pass 2♣.

 

On hand 2, seems like you might have a slam: 6♦. 2♦ by North is an underbid and 2NT by south is just wrong.

 

On hand 3, a direct bash of 3NT is ok and might even work out in your favour, like it actually did for you.

 

On hand 4, what was 3♣? I think North went crazy opposite a limited 2NT bidder.

 

 

Sorry to have not answered your question...

[matmat]

Assuming ACOL is similar to SAYC... (If not, please ignore)

 

Frankly, I think you are playing in a bad field and got lucky to gain IMPS.

 

On Hand 1, if 2♣ bid is unlimited (like inverted minors), then you either bid 2♥ or 3♣ if 2♥ won't be construed a reverse. What was 2♦? If 2♣ is limited, you should pass 2♣.

 

On hand 2, seems like you might have a slam: 6♦. 2♦ by North is an underbid and 2NT by south is just wrong.

 

On hand 3, a direct bash of 3NT is ok and might even work out in your favour, like it actually did for you.

 

On hand 4, what was 3♣? I think North went crazy opposite a limited 2NT bidder.

 

 

Sorry to have not answered your question...

I think I am going to have to agree with Trumpace. In fact, I think most of the auctions were terrible, with some of the calls looking like they would have to be alerted in any sort of a regular partnership.

[NickRW]

How do you weigh risk for a 3NT bid when you think one of your suits may be weak?

 

Well, if you're going to get defence like this, then clearly you hardly need to bother worrying! Seriously though, if a given lead appears to be marked (because your side has bid 3 suits naturally for example), then you should normally be quite wary of NT unless one of you can come up with a decent stop. Even then, a single stop may not be good enough if you can't generate 9 tricks quickly.

 

I've  brought a few dodgy 3NT contracts home recently, against the rest of the field. I'm wondering if this is because I play acol, which often seems to put you against the field on BBO for NT, or another reason  :huh:

 

You will get a few anti field results if your system is different to the field. If you're a good card player who hopes to out score the opponents on the card play alone, this is not at all desirable. If you reckon you're a better bidder - well you can win some hands by arriving at better contracts too.

 

Boards rotated so that I'm south throughout. I can't remember the leads, unfortunately. The wrong ones I guess. What do you think of bidding 3NT? Is the right lead for the defence obvious? Contract was top board in each case.

 

Certainly on board 2 you were way lucky. The lead was marked, the lead was made and then they messed it up. On the others one would need to see the defending hands, but they might well have found the killer lead.

 

Nick

[mikeh]

I think that you are in danger of falling into a common B/I error... you made a number of hideous bids, got lucky, and are thinking that maybe you were exercising good judgement. We all like to think that our good results say something good about our methods, and (not coincidentally) we tend to remember good results more than bad ones.

 

You will do far better (in the long run) and will (eventually) attract better partners if you learn to avoid these kinds of 3N contracts... and, if you don't, you will get crushed once you start playing against competent opps. You can fool good opps once in a while, but usually they will get the defence right.

[Flameous]

On the first deal 3NT seems absolutely horrible and it seems the defence gave you way too many gifts to be realistic. On second one I think I'd like to be in 6D rather than in 3NT, it seems everything was wrong if 3NT gave that much IMPs. On 3rd and 4th I think 3NT is "not that good but shouldn't be avoided" meaning that there is no need to make systems to avoid these. They have reasonable chances is opps don't make the right lead.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 2D should show a diamond stopper, or 5-4,

South has neither.

Add to this the fact, that South knowes, the

partnership has at most 23HCP, I am generous,

assuming 2C could be based on a hand with

6-10HCP, looking beyond a partial is ...

 

#2 Ok, the opponents were already on track of

beating you, why do you ask, if it was a brilliant

idea to bid 3NT?

South decide to hide the support, for no sensible

reasons, with the result, that you would have got

a minus score, game (maybe even slam) being

cold.

 

#3 Unless 1C denies a 4 card heart suit, the obivious

risk of a 3NT bid is, that you go down in NT, while

a game with hearts as trumps makes.

Of course 3NT is also an overbid by at least a king,

sometimes partner happen to hold min. values.

 

#4 Partner 2NT is, he buries the hearts, but it is fine,

3C is natural not Stayman.

4NT is ..., as opener you know, that the partnership

has at most 27HCP, how many points do you need

for slam?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[awm]

Hand 1: The right defense should be quite obvious to good defenders. A wrong lead isn't enough to let this one through -- you aren't anywhere close to nine top tricks. South overbid substantially; you should be in a club partscore.

 

Hand 2: Again the right defense is easy (lead the unbid suit!) Opponents even made the right lead. These are very poor defenders. The right call by south is not 2NT with 4♦ and no club control -- he should bid 3♦ after which 5♦ or 6♦ will be reached.

 

Hand 3: North's opening is extremely aggressive, (only 10 hcp, not really that much shape). South's 3NT bid is normal. You probably have nine tricks if they don't cash out spades. This kind of 3NT is normal to be in, and makes close to half the time even against decent defenders.

 

Hand 4: North should bid 3NT over 2NT. I don't know what he was doing bidding his singleton club. Usually south will have clubs controlled to be bidding 2NT anyway (he normally doesn't have a four card major, although four small in a 4333 hand is quite reasonable). Again this is a fairly normal contract. It will often make, as the opening leader will suspect south of holding some club cards. Getting to 5NT is ridiculous of course.

[el mister]

Thanks all for the replies. V. Helpful, even with the erratic bidding / defence as sub-optimal examples for the question.

 

The last hand came about because P mistook my 2NT for Jacoby 2NT showing a strong hand, bid the short suit etc.

 

One mistake I think I may be making is automatically looking for 3NT when we have a minor suit fit. I was taught this in my first bridge class, it's a long way to 5m as a sort of beginners maxim, and it's sunk in. In the second hand, for example, the first thing I will have thought on finding the ♦ fit is let's see if we can find 3NT. Hence the (silly) 2NT invite. I think I need to work on bidding game in the minors more.

 

I've read that there is a clear dichotomy between matchpoints / IMPS when weighing up 3NT / 5m. At matchpoints you should always go for 3NT if you can - is this the case? Why?

[ASkolnick]

OK. The difference between matchpoints is the scoring difference. And the fact that overtricks matter more at matchpoints.

 

In IMPS, the object is to get to the safest game since overtricks aren't worth as much.

Let's take an example where 3N makes 4 and 5 of a minor makes exactly.

 

The difference in IMPS is 1 IMP (30 pts), this is hardly consequential to any sort of match or IMP Pairs.

 

However, if you look at a matchpoint score and 5 people are in 3N making 4, and 2 of you are in 5 of a minor, you would get a very poor matchpoint score.

 

If 3N and 5 of a minor both make exactly, its a draw.

If 3N makes any overtricks, it will be a better score than 5 of a minor unless you make 7.

 

So for 5 of a minor to be good, it usually needs to be the only making contract. This obviously doesn't mean you should never bid 5 of a minor, just try to resist it if possible.

[Trumpace]

<snip>

 

...In the second hand, for example, the first thing I will have thought on finding the ♦ fit is let's see if we can find 3NT. Hence the (silly) 2NT invite. I think I need to work on bidding game in the minors more.

 

<snip>

The issue I see here is not about knowing when to bid 3NT vs 5m. There is a more fundamental issue lurking I think...

 

On hand 2 your 2NT bid says, "Partner, I don't trust you to make the right decision".

 

Bridge is a partnership game, and half the time your pd will be the one to decide the final contract. On hand2 you should bid 3♦ and then your pd can then choose between 3NT and 5m/6m if there is a decision to be made.

 

You don't have to make all the decisions yourself, you have a partner sitting opposite who will sometimes be in a better position than you to judge the hand. Trying to make all the decisions yourself just shows that your fundamental understanding of bidding (and not just minor suit game bidding) needs improvement.

[ASkolnick]

TrumpAce, I was just answering the last part of his post, not the original one.

[barmar]

On hand 2 your 2NT bid says, "Partner, I don't trust you to make the right decision".

It also says, "You can't trust my bidding, either." Making 2NT generally requires a combined 23 HCP. Opener hasn't promised any extra values, so you're showing at least a good 10 HCP, as well as a stopper in the unbid suit, when you bid 2NT. You were lucky to find partner with a maximum for his bid, but he could have raised you to 3NT with about a queen less.

 

With only 8 HCP you have 3 choices:

 

Pass

Bid your suit again if you have 6 of them

Raise one of partner's suits