judgement

[whereagles]

I'll let it float. That's my best guess. Pard is probably stuck for a bid with his featureless 11-count.

[gszeszycki]

while no strong scientific way to explore some thought on scoring might help with our decision.

 

MP

since merely setting 4s 1 trick x gains more mp than setting 4s w/o x the x by partner can be done on a small amount of power p will probably x 4s with as little as Kxx xxxx Qxxx Axx---opposite this I should be more than happy to collect my (hopefully positive score) and pass.

 

IMP

We do not worry about collecting a small extra + score for setting 4s 1 trick (r/w)thus the X by partner has to be much better either expecting to beat 4s 2 or more tricks or expecting us to make at the 5 level or higher when we have an average hand.

The distributions are not balanced thus responder can only count on us for 1 1/2 tricks for our opening bid. This means partner has around 3 1/2 tricks in order to set 4s at least 2. Since it is almost impossible for P to be looking at 3 1/2 tricks on defense (we have too many controls) we can only assume they have a hand with sufficient values where making something at the 5 level is reasonable opposite a balanced minimum.

Our hand is anything but balanced and any reasonable x by p must give us great play for 6 or even 7 (with 7 being very tough to discover) the process of elimination would make it seem that

 

5N

 

is the standout bid which should be fairly obvious pick a slam btn clubs and hearts.

 

I must admit some sympathy for 5c bidders since playing 5c will almost surely score more IMPS than defending 4s x. But the mathematics on minor suit slams

1370 to 620 vs -100 to 600 favors bidding even a 50% slam 750-700.

[gnasher]

You pass and wait to see if partner makes a takeout double. If he doesn't, it's unlikely that you've missed a game.

 

Well yes, but what if you have a good enough hand that passing is obviously wrong.

So you have a 3361 shape that is strong enough to think it likely that you were making some game, but with such poor diamonds that it doesn't feel right to bid them at the five level? Something like Axx AKx K10xxxx x ?

 

That's not a very attractive problem - double will often lead to a minus score in 5♣ or 5♥, but pass will sometimes miss game or slam in diamonds. It would be unfortunate to defend 4♠ undoubled opposite x Qxxx AQx Axxxx. I suppose we have to double and then live with the consequences.

 

I think you'd have to be pretty strong to double with this shape though, and I don't think we should let that possibility affect our decision on the originally posted hand.

Edited July 1, 2010 by gnasher

[Finch]

When will it gain to bid 4NT? When partner has a singleton club - 2551 or 3(45)1, clubs don't break, and he passes 5♣. (I'm not sure how often he'd remove to 5♦ with 2551; possibly never.)

I would go with something close to never.

 

I'd probably just bid 5C on this hand, but I don't mind 4NT as obviously it can work well.

 

There's also a (somewhat subtle) possible inference, I think, that 4NT is on average a slightly stronger hand than a 5C bid so may get us to a slam that 5C won't. We'd bid 5C on lots of weakish opening bids with very long clubs, but as others have pointed out we will pass on the double on some minimum 2-suiters. that's an argument for 4NT.

 

I don't understand driving slam. OK, I understand it, but if this is a slam force then your partner isn't doubling 4S often enough.