Bypassing 4 card major on 4333

[Fluffy]

I am testing lately the merits of bidding 1m-p-1NT with 4333 containing 4 card major, so far it is working better than I expected, but this might be due to hand-hogging the client rather than real merits.

 

I wonder what you guys think about this tactic, assuming a serious partnership were both players are expert.

 

I play on a strong NT context with best minor, and we never ever raise 1M to 2M with 3 cards.

[PhantomSac]

I would do this about 0 % of the time given your specifications (both expert partners, never raise on 3). That is coming from someone who has done it a lot for the other reason you mentioned and also just cuz I used to do it a lot.

[Phil]

Seems to work better to bid 1N on the 4333 at MPs and the hand has to be pretty quacky + a horrible four card major.

 

i've had mixed success with the 11's - you can always get back to NT, and bidding the crappy suit inhibits the lead a lot.

[Fluffy]

My biggest success comes when opponents switch to my suit actually

[helene_t]

My biggest success comes when opponents switch to my suit actually

That wouldn't work so well for Phil who only does it with horrible suits :)

 

But as Justin says, if you never raise on 3 then it is probably not such a great idea. Can also cause partne to overcompete if he takes your 1nt bid seriously and thinks you have 7+ minor suit cards.

 

Btw, what's the point of hogging the contract with a client? Is he playing all that money for being dummy all the time?

[WesleyC]

Playing transfers over 1C (where 1C - 1NT shows (11)12 HCP, INV) it's common to bid 1NT on some hands with a 4cM, including most 4333s. In this context, you've obviously got different objectives though.

[gszes]

There is an oddity in the logic of those proposing a 4 card major be bypassed. The oddity is that those same players will never intentionally bypass a known 44 major suit fit to play 1 or 2 nt they will always raise the major. If it seems reasonable to take a chance on missing a major suit fit why not be just as willing to intentionally bypass a known major suit fit to play 1n?? Is the slam/competitive bidding so much more useful when one takes the risk of bypassing a 44 major suit fit? Is it really reasonable to have the "weaker" hand suddenly become a huge favorite to become declarer (client dummy privileges aside)?

[jallerton]

I would do this about 0 % of the time given your specifications (both expert partners, never raise on 3). That is coming from someone who has done it a lot for the other reason you mentioned and also just cuz I used to do it a lot.

 

Yes, it's a more interesting question if partner is allowed to raise with 3-card support.

 

Here's a hand I got wrong recently. ♠10xxx ♥Kxx ♦QJ10 ♣Qxx. Partner opened 1♦(5+ OR 4441). I responded 1♠, partner raised to 2♠ which could not be made when trumps were 5-1, whilst both 1NT and 2♦ were far better contracts and making overtricks on the layout. On reflection, I thought I should have responded 1NT, but one of my teammates (who normally finds a reason for the winning action) insisted that 1♠ was right.

[jogs]

I had always bid 1♠. But the more I think about it the more I like 1NT.

 

On the second question bid 1♠ and plan to pass 1NT. Sometimes opponents reopen against our 23-25 HCP.

[steve2005]

I ve come across opponents who have done. without a suit of my own I have led small from Axx♠ only to fund dummy with 4♠, annoying.

[ggwhiz]

My partner is an absolute master at when to raise with 3.... provided I bid 1nt with this shape

[jogs]

I love this idea and would carry it further. Pd opens 1♦. With 4=3=2=4 AND most of the points in the rounded suits, bid 1NT.