Quantative ask

[sceptic]

Hi I just watched this bidding

 

1NT 12-14

2NT diamonds

3 D

4NT alerted as Quantative

 

irrespective if what the hands are what should partner do when faced with 4NT quantative bid

 

questions I have

How to sign off?

should I bid key card?

what do I need to raise to slam after denying a good diamond fit and a max hand?

 

any other thoughts on this please let me know as I do find quantative bids confusing at times

[jjbrr]

Hi I just watched this bidding

 

1NT 12-14

2NT diamonds

3 D

4NT alerted as Quantative

 

irrespective if what the hands are what should partner do when faced with 4NT quantative bid

 

questions I have

How to sign off?

should I bid key card?

what do I need to raise to slam after denying a good diamond fit and a max hand?

 

any other thoughts on this please let me know as I do find quantative bids confusing at times

1) Pass, 5♦, 6♦, 6NT are all sign off. 5NT says pick.

 

2) No.

 

3) Why have you denied a max hand? You can still have a max hand without a good fit, with which you would raise. Can you still have xxx in ♦? Jxx? Qxx? QJx? xxxx? Those would all be reasons to accept if you aren't min.

[sceptic]

3) Why have you denied a max hand? You can still have a max hand without a good fit, with which you would raise. Can you still have xxx in ♦? Jxx? Qxx? QJx? xxxx? Those would all be reasons to accept if you aren't min.

 

 

 

I said both, not one or the other

[jjbrr]

Quantitative over NT auctions is simple: Bid slam with a max, pass with a min.

[pooltuna]

Quantitative over NT auctions is simple: Bid slam with a max, pass with a min.

if you are going to accept why not answer keycard? It may give you a good reason to stay out.

[Fluffy]

Quantitative over NT auctions is simple: Bid slam with a max, pass with a min.

if you are going to accept why not answer keycard? It may give you a good reason to stay out.

you cannot play 5♦ then

 

And also i you bid 5♥ and you miss 2 your chances or making 6 have gone from slim to zero

[gwnn]

Quantitative over NT auctions is simple: Bid slam with a max, pass with a min.

if you are going to accept why not answer keycard? It may give you a good reason to stay out.

because 5NT is a very sad and lonely place :P (assuming you mean quantitative over NT auctions in general)

[kenrexford]

If Responder makes a quantitative 4NT, and you accept but on the way answer RKCB or Blackwood, and if the answer is too high to play 5♦, then you play 5NT. What's the problem? What, you think partner will make a quantitative 4NT and then bid 5NT as a grand try?

 

I'm not saying that answering is necessarily right. I'm just saying that the objections are bizarre.

[jjbrr]

If Responder makes a quantitative 4NT, and you accept but on the way answer RKCB or Blackwood, and if the answer is too high to play 5♦, then you play 5NT. What's the problem? What, you think partner will make a quantitative 4NT and then bid 5NT as a grand try?

 

I'm not saying that answering is necessarily right. I'm just saying that the objections are bizarre.

Ken, when partner invites you to game, and you accept, do you start cuebidding all your good cards to tell the opponents where everything is and allow them the opportunity to double or do you just bid game?

 

How is this different?

[pooltuna]

If Responder makes a quantitative 4NT, and you accept but on the way answer RKCB or Blackwood, and if the answer is too high to play 5♦, then you play 5NT.  What's the problem?  What, you think partner will make a quantitative 4NT and then bid 5NT as a grand try?

 

I'm not saying that answering is necessarily right.  I'm just saying that the objections are bizarre.

Ken, when partner invites you to game, and you accept, do you start cuebidding all your good cards to tell the opponents where everything is and allow them the opportunity to double or do you just bid game?

 

How is this different?

you are looking for a way to stay out of an unmakeable slam which is after all what Blackwood is really about.

[jdonn]

Ken you just said "If something happens you play 5NT, what's the problem?" Uh, you don't see a problem with that?

 

There are some rare auctions where I have advocated being able to stop in 5NT before, but at least I don't pretend I don't see a problem with it!

[jjbrr]

If Responder makes a quantitative 4NT, and you accept but on the way answer RKCB or Blackwood, and if the answer is too high to play 5♦, then you play 5NT.  What's the problem?  What, you think partner will make a quantitative 4NT and then bid 5NT as a grand try?

 

I'm not saying that answering is necessarily right.  I'm just saying that the objections are bizarre.

Ken, when partner invites you to game, and you accept, do you start cuebidding all your good cards to tell the opponents where everything is and allow them the opportunity to double or do you just bid game?

 

How is this different?

you are looking for a way to stay out of an unmakeable slam which is after all what Blackwood is really about.

Blackwood? I thought we were talking about quantitative 4NT. Feel free to have whatever agreements you want with your partners, but I don't think answering keycards in this auction is a good idea. I think 5♣ natural might be useful on many hands, and what does a 5♦ response mean to 4NT? and why is partner bidding quantitatively with no aces, which is what we're worried about with 5M responses?

[Siegmund]

The answer is going to depend a lot on what the 3D bid showed, I think.

 

In the not-quite-comparable auctions like 1N-2D,2H-4N, where opener has said nothing at all about the quality of his support, the notion of "max" has a lot to do with whether your long suit is running - such that holding Kx or Qx and 16 is likely better than holding xx in partner's suit with 17.

 

If 3D has already denied possession of a top diamond honour, then I think this is pretty close to a straight pass-with-15 go-with-17 sequence.

[Phil]

Its quite possible that we have a maximum hand but we still want to show something useful over 4N. Its quite reasonable for using certain five level bids to show 0/1/2 aces or key cards whatever in some auctions, and it is sensible for 5x to show suits with a certain quality in other sequences.

 

After 1N - minor transfer - acceptance - 4N, how many strains do we need to look at? I would expect the logical contracts to be 4N, 6♦ or 6N, however I see no harm in using the five level to be sure we aren't off two aces or the ♦AK. Unlike the others, I see no harm in playing 5N with a pair of hands like:

 

AKx

xx

QJTxxx

Ax

 

opposite

 

Qxx

AKQ

xxx

KQJx

 

How you can codify 5x in response to a quant 4N is largely a partnership agreement.

[jdonn]

I also see no harm in playing 5NT with 11 certain tricks, no more and no less. Somehow I never seem to be able to tell that is the case during the bidding though.

[pooltuna]

I also see no harm in playing 5NT with 11 certain tricks, no more and no less. Somehow I never seem to be able to tell that is the case during the bidding though.

Clearly you need easy access to this location

 

contract guarantor

 

as you have problems with risk :lol:

[kenrexford]

Ken you just said "If something happens you play 5NT, what's the problem?" Uh, you don't see a problem with that?

 

There are some rare auctions where I have advocated being able to stop in 5NT before, but at least I don't pretend I don't see a problem with it!

There's one thing that seems obvious, though. If my options are to bid slam, period, or to find out if we are missing two Aces on the way, planning on signing off at 5NT if we are missing two Aces, then 5NT is certainly better than slam.

 

I could do all sorts of analyses on why, but it seems fairly obvious. Two Aces = going down. 5NT is not down yet.

 

Is 5NT "great stuff?" No. But it is MUCH better than 6♦.

[kenrexford]

I also see no harm in playing 5NT with 11 certain tricks, no more and no less. Somehow I never seem to be able to tell that is the case during the bidding though.

So dense you are, worthy of two responses!

 

Whereas knowing that 11 tricks are available for our side might be an elusive task, knowing that the opponents have two defensive tricks seems rather easy, when the two tricks are Aces. When I have a choice between a 6-level contract and a 5-level contract, I am less concerned with "getting to 11" as I am about the opponents "getting to two."

[Fluffy]

Lol, we could play Insurance Contract Bridge, where for just 150 points you can contract 6♠, but if ♠K is on LHO's hands, contract will become 5♠ only.

 

Maybe a way to deal with the high variance finese-slams role on short team matches.

[Old York]

Hi I just watched this bidding

 

1NT 12-14

2NT diamonds

3 D

4NT alerted as Quantative

 

irrespective if what the hands are  what should partner do when faced with 4NT quantative bid

 

questions I have 

How to sign off?

should I bid key card?

what do I need to raise to slam after denying a good  diamond fit and a max hand?

 

any other thoughts on this please let me know as I do find quantative bids confusing at times

Hiya Wayne

 

Imagine the bidding had gone:

 

1NT (12-14) - 4NT (19-20)

 

Now look at your hand and decide whether to pass or bid 6NT, or take some other action

 

If your decision is not clear, then look at your holding in the Diamond suit... with some goodies in diamonds, then a keycard response should be safe (as recommended in Michele Brunner's book)

 

Maybe we can discuss this over a pint at BBO Coventry 8th-10th Jan? :(

 

Tony

p.s. Was 1NT-3♦ available as a slam try, if so then partner's diamonds must be excellent to bid 2NT instead?

[sceptic]

Funny old world it was Michelle Brunner and John Holland I was watching this is their bidding Tony. I have no idea what agreements they have in this particular case, I am just curious about how to respond to quantative bids

 

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=s6hq6532dt865ct63&w=skt752ha97dq7ca74&e=sa8hk8daj942ckqj9&s=sqj943hjt4dk3c852]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 -     -     -     Pass

 1NT   Pass  2NT   Pass

 3♦    Pass  4NT   Pass

 5♠    Pass  6NT   Pass

 Pass  Pass  

[jjbrr]

as I've said, I think it's clear to play 5♣ natural in this auction if transfering to ♦ can include 4♣

[jdonn]

I also see no harm in playing 5NT with 11 certain tricks, no more and no less. Somehow I never seem to be able to tell that is the case during the bidding though.

So dense you are, worthy of two responses!

 

Whereas knowing that 11 tricks are available for our side might be an elusive task, knowing that the opponents have two defensive tricks seems rather easy, when the two tricks are Aces. When I have a choice between a 6-level contract and a 5-level contract, I am less concerned with "getting to 11" as I am about the opponents "getting to two."

Thank you for the insult, I'll learn to play bridge at your high level one day. I suppose when someone shows a 6 card suit in response to 1NT then tries for slam and then you find out you are off 2 aces, you are guaranteed to have the other 32 high card points and thus have complete certainty the opponents won't get a third trick. In that case you are doing very well to get to 5NT.

[kenrexford]

I also see no harm in playing 5NT with 11 certain tricks, no more and no less. Somehow I never seem to be able to tell that is the case during the bidding though.

So dense you are, worthy of two responses!

 

Whereas knowing that 11 tricks are available for our side might be an elusive task, knowing that the opponents have two defensive tricks seems rather easy, when the two tricks are Aces. When I have a choice between a 6-level contract and a 5-level contract, I am less concerned with "getting to 11" as I am about the opponents "getting to two."

Thank you for the insult, I'll learn to play bridge at your high level one day. I suppose when someone shows a 6 card suit in response to 1NT then tries for slam and then you find out you are off 2 aces, you are guaranteed to have the other 32 high card points and thus have complete certainty the opponents won't get a third trick. In that case you are doing very well to get to 5NT.

OMG!!!

 

I don't understand for the life of me why this is still an unclear issue.

 

Here's what happens. One person shows slam interest with length in a minor, and presumably no voids. If he has a void, he can see that aspect of his hand. It is in front of him.

 

So, he bids 4NT to show that hand -- slam interest. But, 4NT is passable.

 

Whether all of this so far makes any sense or not is irrelevant, because this is what we were presented with.

 

Then, Opener can decide to pass, declining, or to accept. Some proposed that acceptance means answering aces. Fine. Maybe this makes sense.

 

However, the objection was that a 5♥ or 5♠ answer leaves no solution if we have two clear losers. I said that this makes no sense, because 5NT is an option.

 

The question, then, is not whether we play in 5NT or 4NT, or even 5♦. The question is whether on route to 6♦ we might opt out at 5NT when we KNOW that there are two losers out there.

 

I don't give a crap whether we can get to 11 tricks or not in that situation. We know that we cannot get to 12 before the opponents get to 2, so 5NT is the only POSSIBLE contract. 5NT will not be a certainty. 32 HCP are not known to exist. The defense could set 5NT. But, 5NT has in theory a chance. 6♦ does not.

 

Therefore, to my simple thinking, if I have a choice between a 6♦ contract, where I know that the opponents can cash at least two tricks, and a 5NT contract, where I know that the opponents can cash at least two tricks, I hope that 2 is all that they can cash and bid 5NT. If I am right, I make 5NT. If I am wrong, 5NT goes down just like 6♦, and I am no worse off. I might even be better off, down only one instead of down two. That would be nice too.

 

Unfortunately, there is no bid that takes back. I cannot bid, for example, 5♦ over 5♥. I also cannot answer Aces with two bids, using normal methods. If 5♣ was "odd" and 5♦ "even," then that might work.

[jonottawa]

So did it make?

 

I love it when I'm in a potentially ambiguous auction and a bid has a couple of possible meanings and my hand happens to cover both. 5♠ would seem to qualify here.

 

E might have showed minors rather than just ♦. 6♣ looks like the best slam.