This explanations on 3nt is incorrect.

[lycier]

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=机器人&s=SAKQJ9HKQ9DJTCQJ7&wn=lycier&w=ST764HT54DAK8CT83&nn=机器人&n=S5HAJ87632D62CK62&en=机器人&e=S832HDQ97543CA954&d=s&v=e&b=35&a=1S(Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20%21S%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points)P1N(Forcing%20one%20notrump%20--%203-%20%21S%3B%206+%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points)P3N(Game%20in%20notrump%20--%202-4%20%21C%3B%202-4%20%21D%3B%202-4%20%21H%3B%205%20%21S%3B%2019-21%20HCP%3B%2022-%20total%20points)PPP&p=D5DJDKD6DAD2D3DTD8H3D7S9C3C6CAC7DQH9C8H2D9CJCTH8D4CQS4H7C9HQS6CKH6S2HKH4SAS7S5S8SKSTC2S3SQH5HAC4SJHTHJC5]400|300[/hv]

 

3nt says " Game in notrump - 2-4♣,2-4♦,2-4♥,5♠,19-21hcp,22-Tps".

There are many problems on it.

 

1- What's "game in notrump"? It tells its pd : pd,you never change my decision,even with 7-card ♥ !!!

Is it correct?

 

2- If there is 20-21hcp in opener hand with 5-card ♠,I am afraid that it should be a opening mistake.

 

IMO,the explanations of 3nt is " Solid 5-6 cards ♠ with 19-21hcp without any singleton / voidness ".

 

So I think this explanation on 3nt is incorrect.

[cloa513]

You mean you feel its definition of that bid in that sequence is not good. Its explanation is totally correct ie totally accurate description of the hand it has however North's response that bid is totally stupid. The problem is that it has no clear forcing bid over 1NT so 3NT as 19-21 HCP is reasonable. I believe 2NT is not forcing neither is 2C or 2D. Its a standard problem with most systems- if you have forcing 1NT then there is no simple way to explore alternative contracts towards 3NT.