Finch Posted March 21, 2012 Report Share Posted March 21, 2012 I agree with the ruling, but this is mainly because on the information givn, South doesn't seem to be able to explain what 3NT actually means in their system and hence has no explanation for bidding 4D other than the UI. But suppose you had a slightly more sophisticated South player, perhaps in the context of South already being a passed hand and not being certain if they played lebensohl. There seems to be a strong view on this thread that not only is pass a LA, but that 4D isn't one. Well, I couldn't have quite this auction (because I wouldn't bid 2NT on the South hand to start with, it's too strong), but if I did, and partner raised 2NT to 3NT, I would expect a supter-strong balanced hand opposite as West suggested. Opposite a 2NT opening such as Axx AKxx Axx KQJ I want to be in 6D. Opposite a less control-rich hand such as Qxx AKxx Qx AKQx 5D is a better spot than 3NT. It's hard to construct a hand where 3NT makes and 4NT and 5D both go off. So I think it's an interesting bidding problem, but 4D is certainly a LA. That makes giving a PP for bidding 4D a bit tricky. So I'd want to talk to South a bit further before giving a PP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted March 22, 2012 Report Share Posted March 22, 2012 Surely West would lead a spade against 3NT, and South will only go off if he really plays it incompetently - and then only one off.I agree with the rest of the post, although Frances' argument that 4D could be a slam try is worth investigating, although the tone of the OP suggests that this is not so. But surely West would lead a heart through the presumed strong hand. Declarer will surely play low and East will win with the ten and surely switch to the ten of spades. West will clear the spades and win the queen of diamonds at some point. The defence will surely take five spades, and one trick in each of the other suits for four off. Surely declarer will get the clubs right in the ending. My guess is some weighting of one off, four off and five off is right. I would guess 10% 1 off, 80% 4 off, and 10% 5 off, as I regard the heart lead as almost automatic, but would poll peers, perhaps at the Lords v Commons match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted March 22, 2012 Report Share Posted March 22, 2012 - we still cannot delete duplicate posts on here - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted March 22, 2012 Report Share Posted March 22, 2012 I can. I did so. Note that neither David nor I has any control over who can do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted March 22, 2012 Report Share Posted March 22, 2012 I agree with the ruling, but this is mainly because on the information givn, South doesn't seem to be able to explain what 3NT actually means in their system and hence has no explanation for bidding 4D other than the UI.Totally agree. However, VixTD's problem is in fact a problem, and playing TDs sort of have to live with it. I think I would have done the same thing Vix did, and use the results of the thread as my "PP" (likely through a different director, if I could. I have about 6 I can call on that would be able to explain this without my obvious bias, so one hopes at least one of them doesn't have a similar antagonistic relationship with the player). Opposite a 2NT opening such as Axx AKxx Axx KQJ I want to be in 6D. Opposite a less control-rich hand such as Qxx AKxx Qx AKQx 5D is a better spot than 3NT. It's hard to construct a hand where 3NT makes and 4NT and 5D both go off. So I think it's an interesting bidding problem, but 4D is certainly a LA. That makes giving a PP for bidding 4D a bit tricky.I think that with that argument, you'll have trouble avoiding "so, why did you pass 5♦? What could partner do with a 'more slam-suitable' hand?" I have to admit, I would have trouble. I think that 3NT in my systems should be 20 or so, in which case, unless it's the ace-full 20, 3NT is the best spot. But if it's starting to show 22+, I'd be required by Law to bid 4♦, and I'd use that argument (that passing 3NT is clearly suggested by the UI, because systemically it shows a 22+ish BAL hand, and the UI tells me he doesn't have that, and I have an absolute max for my 2NT call)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dburn Posted March 22, 2012 Report Share Posted March 22, 2012 I'm sorry, I don't know your English levels very well. Is "complete count on the hand" a term normally used when discussing what might happen when a hand is played by "experienced regular county B-team players"?Depends on the county. While discussing the hand, some of the London B team are capable of getting a complete count if you give them the hand records. And about five minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted March 23, 2012 Report Share Posted March 23, 2012 It's only illegal to select from among logical alternatives one suggested by the UI. If you rule that 4D is not a LA, then...This has been discussed many, many, many times. It is accepted that a choice of a non-LA which is suggested by the UI is illegal and subject to adjustment if it damages opponents. There are several arguments as to why this is a legal approach. No point going through them, please accept it. Not to adjust is against accepted interpretations of the UI Laws. If you really want to discuss it again for people who have not read the previous sets of arguments at various times on IBLF, RGB, BLML, and everywhere else, please start a new thread and the logic will be looked at again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.