Stupid risk evaluation question

[gartinmale]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakqjt42hj6d83c74&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1n(15-17)p]133|200[/hv]

 

Okay, so one could Texas transfer to spades. Or, if feeling adventurous, one could Jacoby transfer to spades and then bid 4S, which for my partnership is a mild slam try without shortness. Partner won't like his spades, but if he has a ton of controls...

 

Is there any form of scoring (matchpoints, BAM) at which you would consider playing 3NT? If you do decide you might want to play 3NT, do you blast it or go some other route?

[ahydra]

Well we're certainly not worried about 3NT making - it's just whether partner happens to have the right combination of honours to make 3NT play better than 4S. I'd probably chicken out of 3NT even at BAM, for fear that partner has, say, xx AKQx Axx Qxxx and ends up making 3NT+1 rather than 4S+1.

 

ahydra

[pooltuna]

"Hamman eggs in one basket" is propably the best odds on contract at any form of scoring only a simul will convince me otherwise

[ArtK78]

Well we're certainly not worried about 3NT making - it's just whether partner happens to have the right combination of honours to make 3NT play better than 4S. I'd probably chicken out of 3NT even at BAM, for fear that partner has, say, xx AKQx Axx Qxxx and ends up making 3NT+1 rather than 4S+1.

 

ahydra

Of course you are worried about 3NT making. They could have 5 running tricks in any of the offsuits. Or a combination of 3 + 2 or 4 + 1 in two of the offsuits.

 

On the other hand, it is possible that 3NT is the only making game. Consider these possible 1NT opening:

 

xx

AKQT

QJTx

QJT

 

xx

AKQT

KQJ

JT9x

 

So, there are no sure things.

 

At matchpoints, I would seriously consider bidding 3NT in response to 1NT.

[aguahombre]

If we decide this hand is appropriate to show a mild slam try in spades, it would be our prototype to do so via 2-level transfer, then jump to 4♠.

 

The suit is running, and partner looks for 5 more tricks and no two quick losers. Hands which are concerned about a filler card in spades will take a different route; the old-fashioned 3M response is one such method.

[fuburules3]

If you play Walsh relays over 1NT, responder bids 2♦ with this hand and over 2♥ bids 2♠ as a relay to 2NT. Responder then bids 3NT to show a completely solid suit and seven winner hand (3C/3D would be minor suit slam tries with broken suits, 3H/3S would be minor slam tries with one missing honor, 4C/4D would be major suit slam tries with broken suits and so on).

 

Playing this way, opener can only super accept by bidding 2♠

[aguahombre]

If you play Walsh relays over 1NT, responder bids 2♦ with this hand and over 2♥ bids 2♠ as a relay to 2NT. Responder then bids 3NT to show a completely solid suit and seven winner hand (3C/3D would be minor suit slam tries with broken suits, 3H/3S would be minor slam tries with one missing honor, 4C/4D would be major suit slam tries with broken suits and so on).

 

Playing this way, opener can only super accept by bidding 2♠

Actually, the "solid major" adjunct of Walsh relays was constructed with different continuations than that. But, it is possible to describe this one in the WR context, so your point is valid. It just isn't a good idea with a hand like this ---which has three worthless doubletons and thus wrong-sides the hand immediately with the 2S knock-out of the heart transfer.