What is 4NT in this bidding?

[scarletv]

[hv=sn=South&s=SAKQT93HK5DA543C3&wn=West&w=S87H732DKQ987CQ65&nn=North&n=SJ2HAQJD6CAKT9872&en=East&e=S654HT9864DJT2CJ4&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1CP1SP3CP3DP3HP3SP4NP]399|300|[/hv]

 

Playing with a pickup partnership in BBO tourney

IMPs

[eagles123]

in my experience, with a bbo random 4nt is pretty much always blackwood regardless of context.

[mgoetze]

I normally end up voting "quantitative" on these questions but in this case it seems it should clearly be RKCB for spades.

[Jinksy]

I think quantitative, because you have other ways of agreeing ♠s, and you're a limited hand opposite unlimited, so don't want to captain unnecessarily. You could have rebid 3N instead of 3♣, or 4♣ directly, or 4♣ over 3♦, so your hand can't be that single-suited, which makes 4♣ now a ♠ cue in my book. If you wanted to support ♦s, you could have done so a round earlier, so I think 4♦ now would also be a ♠ cue (though less confident about this than the two surrounding bids). 4♥ is obviously not natural. Even if you think 4m should be natural, that would surely make 4♥ some sort of Last Trainy bid, so you're covered for all hands except semi-fitting maxes.

 

If it were RKCB, I think it would be a huge overbid, since P hasn't promised any source of tricks, just a hand with (at least) enough values to scrape for game. As quant, I think it's better, but still too much for me. Your sources of tricks look likely to be beset by entry problems. P likely has a stiff ♣ or worse opposite. He might not even have a sixth ♠ if he wants to keep 3N in the picture. The only plausible slam looks like 6♣, but if P's not strong enough to bid over 3N himself, that's probably no better than on a ♥ finesse and possibly much worse.

 

It being a BBO random doesn't help, but I'll bid 3N and hope S can recover from completely misbidding his hand thus far.

[gordontd]

I don't like the 3H bid: it end-plays partner into bidding 3S with worse spades and a much worse hand than the one held.

[whereagles]

in pick up: 4NT = blackwood

in serious: 4NT = probably quantitative

[Jinksy]

I don't like the 3H bid: it end-plays partner into bidding 3S with worse spades and a much worse hand than the one held.

 

Good point. N has an easy 3N. But S has no business bidding 3♦ and giving him the chance.

[whereagles]

For the record, my bidding would be

 

1♣ 1♠

3♣ 3♠ ( -- ; 6 carder)

4♦ 4NT (spade fit & cue ; RKCB spades)

5♥ 5NT ( -- ; trying a grand.. any extras?)

6♣ 6/7♠ (a good club suit ; meh/I feel lucky)

[helene_t]

Quantitative is impossible. North showd his strength with the 3♣ bid. If he wants to bid notrumps (which he probably should), 3NT is fine.

 

RKC is not much better since North can't know if South has any slam interest at all. If he really has that great spade support he could have supported spades on the previous round istead of torturing partner with a vague 3♥ bid.

 

It looks like both partners are afraid being passed in a partscore and therefore keep making bids which are unhelpful but at least unlikely to be passed. This is a reasonable attitude when playing with a random who may not know which bids are forcing in standard methods. So I can sort of understand the 3♦ bid. But North should not be afraid of bidding 3NT on his 3rd turn. If South passes this it should be fine. Of course, 3NT gives South a problem with this particular hand.

[scarletv]

This is how the bidding continued ...

 

[hv=sn=South&s=SAKQT93HK5DA543C3&wn=West&w=S87H732DKQ987CQ65&nn=North&n=SJ2HAQJD6CAKT9872&en=East&e=S654HT9864DJT2CJ4&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1CP1SP3CP3DP3HP3SP4NP5HP6NP7NPPP&p=DJDAD7D6S3S8SJS4S2S6SKS7SAH2C8S5S9H3C9H4STD8CTH6SQH7C7D2HKD9HJH8H5DQHAH9HQHTD3DKCAC4C3C5CKCJD4C6C2DTD5CQ]399|300|[/hv]

[mgoetze]

I guess 7NT is just South's way of saying "this may be the first time we are playing together, partner, but I hope it is also the last time!"

[jallerton]

I normally end up voting "quantitative" on these questions but in this case it seems it should clearly be RKCB for spades.

 

I normally end up voting "quantitative" on these questions but in this case the auction should not exist. RKCB for spades makes no sense either when Opener limited his hand and then could not give preference to 3♠. The previous few bids have been searching for strain.

 

The only plausible meaning I can think of for 4NT is a good 5♣ bid: in this context probably a singleton heart and a very good club suit (say a 2137 shape) would make most sense.

[PhilKing]

3♣ was quantitive. 4NT does not exist.

 

North should bid 3NT over 3♦ but the 3♦ bid itself looks odd - South should rebid spades (assuming a force of 2♠ was not available on the first round) and then bid 4♦ over 3♥ or 3NT.

[neilkaz]

I must not be looking at the same hands as those who've voted "no" for 4NT being an overbid! Just what has South done in this auction to show anything more than a bit of extra strength by not passing 3♣?

[neilkaz]

I guess 7NT is just South's way of saying "this may be the first time we are playing together, partner, but I hope it is also the last time!"

Gee...not bidding 7♠ in case a ♣ or two needs to be ruffed to establish the suit didn't cost much, did it? :lol:

[rmnka447]

As others have said, no fit has been established and partner has already limited his hand, so 4 NT can't be quantitative. It must be RKCB

for ♠. I think opener can't be sure what responder's hand is, so $ NT seems an overbid.

 

It seems to me if partner takes control of the auction with 4 NT then he sets the final contract. It might be embarrassing if partner shows up with something like ♠ x ♥ AJ10 ♦ Kx ♣ AK10xxxx and 7 doesn't make.

[neilkaz]

in my experience, with a bbo random 4nt is pretty much always blackwood regardless of context.

Yep

[helene_t]

7nt is ok on the logic that south has twice as many hcps than he promised and North bidding can only mean that he found two extra aces since his 3c bid

[P_Marlowe]

I think quantitative, because you have other ways of agreeing ♠s, and you're a limited hand opposite unlimited, so don't want to captain unnecessarily. You could have rebid 3N instead of 3♣, or 4♣ directly, or 4♣ over 3♦, so your hand can't be that single-suited, which makes 4♣ now a ♠ cue in my book. If you wanted to support ♦s, you could have done so a round earlier, so I think 4♦ now would also be a ♠ cue (though less confident about this than the two surrounding bids). 4♥ is obviously not natural. Even if you think 4m should be natural, that would surely make 4♥ some sort of Last Trainy bid, so you're covered for all hands except semi-fitting maxes.

 

The claim, that you have other ways to support spade in a pickup partnership gets contradicted in the following sentences, claiming

that you should use Last Train undiscussed is ...

[P_Marlowe]

I must not be looking at the same hands as those who've voted "no" for 4NT being an overbid! Just what has South done in this auction to show anything more than a bit of extra strength by not passing 3♣?

How about the delayed 3S bid? Could this be interpreted as a slam trial? It can, it may not be, but it can be interpreted that way.

[Trinidad]

I am with Helene and Phil. 4NT simply does not exist after North has limited his hand. North suffers from controlfreakeritis and seems to want to be the captain in every auction. After his 3♣ bid it is simply his job to tell partner what he has, if partner wants to know.

 

As a bridge doctor, I would prescribe to North:

Before every bridge session write down 10 x "Partner can be trusted to make his own decisions. I do not need to do everything myself."

 

Rik

[gszes]

Responders decision to bid 3d then 3s (after 3h) shows a much stronger hand than

a direct 3s over 3c. QJTxxx xx Kx xxx would easily try 3s way too cowardly to

pass 3c. Once opener realizes responder has extra values their hand really needs

nothing more than 2 top spades to make the 5 level safe and responder has at

least twice that power at their disposal so a slam search seems warranted.

 

The 3c bid is indeed limited but there is still a significant difference between

top and bottom of the bid and fit vs no fit this hand happens to be near the tippy

top with a spade fit and a hand that is tough to describe after responder bids 3s

(which hugely increases the odds of them having great spades and not much if anything

in diamonds since they might have preferred 2n with not so good spades and reasonable

dia "stuff".

[jallerton]

Responders decision to bid 3d then 3s (after 3h) shows a much stronger hand than

a direct 3s over 3c. QJTxxx xx Kx xxx would easily try 3s way too cowardly to

pass 3c. Once opener realizes responder has extra values their hand really needs

nothing more than 2 top spades to make the 5 level safe and responder has at

least twice that power at their disposal so a slam search seems warranted.

 

Playing 3♠ over 3♣ as weak is a poor idea as it narrows the bidding spectrum, having as it does a similar effect to only using half of the width of the page when posting on BBF.

 

The 3c bid is indeed limited but there is still a significant difference between top and bottom of the bid and fit vs no fit this hand happens to be near the tippy top with a spade fit and a hand that is tough to describe after responder bids 3s (which hugely increases the odds of them having great spades and not much if anything in diamonds since they might have preferred 2n with not so good spades and reasonable dia "stuff".

 

Yes, there is a significant difference, but if Opener has decent secondary spade support, he shows that by means of reverting to Responder's suit at the first opportunity. This concept is sometimes referred to as a preference bid. When a player fails to make a preference bid, it is often possible to draw an inference about the lack of support.

[Lovera]

I think at this time being RKCB a convenction that substuites classical Blackwood its applicability must be clearly definited to avoid misunderstanding with partner considering all case of bidding possible and establishing rules to say if is or not RKCB (and in that case considering 4NT how quantitative) otherwise holding ambiguity may not be helpful and to be a point of weakness for RKCB, bye.

[Lovera]

This is how the bidding continued ...

 

[hv=sn=South&s=SAKQT93HK5DA543C3&wn=West&w=S87H732DKQ987CQ65&nn=North&n=SJ2HAQJD6CAKT9872&en=East&e=S654HT9864DJT2CJ4&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1CP1SP3CP3DP3HP3SP4NP5HP6NP7NPPP&p=DJDAD7D6S3S8SJS4S2S6SKS7SAH2C8S5S9H3C9H4STD8CTH6SQH7C7D2HKD9HJH8H5DQHAH9HQHTD3DKCAC4C3C5CKCJD4C6C2DTD5CQ]399|300|[/hv]

Althoug North after diamond J for Ace must play all its hearts and have a possibility of fullfil the contract with a pseudosqueeze in the minor (if West unblock diamonds).(Lovera)