Diagnose stopper

[apollo1201]

(edited - corrected for missing C spot)

 

MPs, all green

 

Seems a pretty obvious 3NT to reach when partner decided to speed the sequence and directly bid what she thinks she could make. She was tied and it was the last deal of the evening after a very busy week at work...

 

AJx

9xx

KQxxx

Kx

 

Facing my 1D opening (5cM, strong NT)

 

Kx

xxx

AJxxx

Axx

 

At the other table it was earlier and they still had energy to elaborate and scientifically stop in 4D. Teammates duly cashed in their H tricks on opening lead.

 

The tricky thing is the H suit. xxx facing xx is probably better for 5D but our holding was ok for 3NT when the suit split 4-3.

 

Playing inverted minors (at least invitational values), it goes 1D-2D, 2S (stopper, obviously denying H stop) and 3C (more than invitational hand with C stopper, and likely not enough in H for 3NT, or an ambitious hand that will move again and takes the cheapest descriptive bids on the way to bigger things).

 

Maybe now I should bid 3D as I am quite min, and over partner’s imaginative 3H (I have a half-stop😅, can you cooperate?), I would have to bid an equally imaginative 3NT (I have the other half, as good as yours btw🤣🤣) with 3 small or Qx, and 4D presumably with xx?

 

Or is it just too hard and we were lucky to get the game bonus thanks to playing the board very late in the evening?

[mythdoc]

Straight to 3NT is a bid I made frequently enough in my days in real life bridge, in layouts like the one you shared. It’s not scientific, lol, but it often easily makes if the opening lead gives another trick. Hearts turns out to be your second best fit, albeit with no high cards! (Your hand only has 12 cards btw.)

 

The times when I flew to 3NT worked out far more often than they didn’t, with the outcome that my partner (a better technical player than I) encouraged me to keep doing so and only pulled the bid when it was very obviously necessary to do so.

[Cyberyeti]

This is one of the flaws and strengths of the strong NT, most people here just bid 1N-3N and move on. And btw the lower hand only has 12 cards

[FelicityR]

Bidding scientifically to 4♦ is all well and good if you want to play losing bridge. I just checked the odds of a 4-3 ♥ split which I thought were about 60%. They are actually 62.2%. Given that 5-2 splits are about 30% too, which could mean that the opponents could block the suit or not lead ♥s in the first instance suggests to me that bidding 3NT seems a lot better than crowing over 10 tricks in ♦s.

[Vampyr]

This is one of the flaws and strengths of the strong NT, most people here just bid 1N-3N and move on. And btw the lower hand only has 12 cards

 

Which is it, a flaw or a strength? 🙂

[Cyberyeti]

Which is it, a flaw or a strength? 🙂

 

Both, it also sometimes doesn't bid 3N because how you bid it pinpoints the lead that beats it (to the guy with a doubleton heart for example)

[smerriman]

Bidding scientifically to 4♦ is all well and good if you want to play losing bridge. I just checked the odds of a 4-3 ♥ split which I thought were about 60%. They are actually 62.2%. Given that 5-2 splits are about 30% too, which could mean that the opponents could block the suit or not lead ♥s in the first instance suggests to me that bidding 3NT seems a lot better than crowing over 10 tricks in ♦s.

If you *know* you have 3 hearts each, then of course game is clearly worth bidding - but of course neither of you knows the other has 3, so all of the cases when the opponents have 8 hearts come into play as well.

[akwoo]

I know people who swear by showing shortness rather than stoppers after inverted minors. You show shortness with interest in slam in case it helps; otherwise you play 3N and hope opps guess wrong (since you haven't told them what your stoppers are).

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&w=saj7h953dkq753ck9&e=sk8h864daj864ca62&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dp2d(F1 4+!D 10+ HCP)p3D(NAT 5+!D)p3H(Help?)P3N(OK)ppp]266|200| apollo1201 'MPs, all green. Seems a pretty obvious 3NT to reach when partner decided to speed the sequence and directly bid what she thinks she could make. She was tied and it was the last deal of the evening after a very busy week at work...Playing inverted minors (at least invitational values), it goes 1D-2D, 2S (stopper, obviously denying H stop) and 3C (more than invitational hand with C stopper, and likely not enough in H for 3NT, or an ambitious hand that will move again and takes the cheapest descriptive bids on the way to bigger things). Maybe now I should bid 3D as I am quite min, and over partner's imaginative 3H (I have a half-stop, can you cooperate?), I would have to bid an equally imaginative 3NT (I have the other half, as good as yours btw) with 3 small or Qx, and 4D presumably with xx? Or is it just too hard and we were lucky to get the game bonus thanks to playing the board very late in the evening?

++++++++++++++++

 

I like the apollo1201's partner's imaginative 3♥ = half-stop effort. [/hv]

[dsLawsd]

The system should dictate the response over 2♦.

If 2NT does not show 15+-17, that is my choice looking at Kx in clubs and a spade stopper. I chose 2♠ in that instance.

3NT figures to be the best spot when E has no extras.

But 1♦ - 3NT puts a lot of pressure on the opening leader.

How lucky have you been this session?

[apollo1201]

The system should dictate the response over 2♦.

If 2NT does not show 15+-17, that is my choice looking at Kx in clubs and a spade stopper. I chose 2♠ in that instance.

3NT figures to be the best spot when E has no extras.

But 1♦ - 3NT puts a lot of pressure on the opening leader.

How lucky have you been this session?

Won the board but lost the match. In pairs I am definitely bidding 3NT direct. As you point out let them guess what to lead. And if a normal 6D should be bid, partner is bidding again over that. In teams, laziness could be costly and scoring 4/600 vs 4/630 or 60 is not the end of the world if you bring back a slam bonus once every 10 deals.

[Vampyr]

The system should dictate the response over 2♦.

If 2NT does not show 15+-17, that is my choice looking at Kx in clubs and a spade stopper. I chose 2♠ in that instance.

3NT figures to be the best spot when E has no extras.

 

 

If 2NT Does not show 15 - 17 then West has already opened a weak NT.

 

But 1♦ - 3NT puts a lot of pressure on the opening leader.

 

Yes. Every time I have experienced this auction a slam has been missed.

[helene_t]

Don't worry about stoppers if both hands are balanced:

- If 3NT doesn't make, quite likely no other game makes either

- Not leaking info about stoppers may allow you to make the contract when opps make the wrong lead

- Failure to open or rebid NT with balanced hands give partner a wrong picture. Worse, they won't trust you next time when you actually do have an unbalanced hand.

- Stopping in 4m is not worth it. 4m is often needed as a slam try, and you don't want to create confusion with some 4m bids being nonforcing.

- That opps didn't bid increases the chance that the suit is 4-4

[gwnn]

Yep helene_t has it right.

 

My favourite "system" (I wouldn't call such a simple structure a system) over inv min is:

1♣-2♣

2♦ = minimum, artificial, could be balanced

rest = GF natural (responder can raise with 3-card support if in doubt)

 

1♣-2♣

2♦-?

2M = natural (stopper I guess, but use it rarely)

2NT = balanced invite (3♣ is a signoff)

3♣ = natural invite

 

easy

 

1♦-2♦ = forcing to 3♦. 3♦ from either side shows a minimum and can be passed. Otherwise, bid your hand.

 

Showing stoppers is closer to pseudoscience than science. It leads to muddled auctions without clear ranges and shape definition.

 

It is true that I sometimes get burned in the club when they don't overcall with perfectly fine hands like

 

1♣-p

Axx

KJTxx

xxx

xx,

lead a heart and cash 5 tricks (and look at me like "why didn't he look for a heart stop?"). But against those opponents I expect to win about 90% of partscore battles, so I am fine with it.

 

PS I wouldn't mind bidding inv min with a 4-card major either. You can easily fit it all in the above... I think it was awm who said it's a bit weird that 1♦-2♣ can have a 4-card major but not 1♦-2♦. If we wanted to show strength first rather than a major, wouldn't we rather do it with a fit than with some random unbid minor?

(obv I would only do it if this is our agreement)

[Zelandakh]

Over inverted minors I like an idea that I picked up from BBF many years back, I think originally from Frances. Playing the first step as balanced means that 2 balanced hands can often just bid 3NT without further information exchange. It is basically the same concept as mentioned by Helene and Csaba only taken to its logical conclusion.

[mikeh]

I endorse helene’s Post and that part of gwnn’s In which he criticizes the stopper-showing responses to an inverted minor.

 

In minor suit sequences, having opener show general size and shape is far more effective than having him start with stopper showing.

 

When I play inverted minors (in the partnership in which we are working hard on method, we play an artificial 2C relay response structure, but the idea is similar), we focus on size and shape. Thus over 2D, there are various schemes but an easy one is 2H any shapely hand, 2S minimum balanced, 2N extras, balanced. Then responder can relay if interested. Here, responder just bids 3N over a balanced minimum. Btw, that’s not what I play, but it’s analogous and easy to remember.

 

Often hearts are 4-3. When they are 5-2, half the time opening leader has the doubleton.

 

Of course, one can always tell the opps that one has no heart stopper and force them to lead hearts. That would be what an updated version of Simon’s unlucky expert would do. Win the post-mortem by super-accurate bidding and lose the imps by missing an easy 3N.

[KingCovert]

Chalk this up as one win in the column of, "Don't tell opponents more than you need to". Of course, I don't know if in your system it's possible to have diamond slam here? If so, then, well, **shrug**.

 

EDIT: I had a hand last night that went like this,

 

1♣: 15+ HCP.

2♦: 0-(bad) 9, exactly 4♠ and a longer suit, or 6+♠.

2♥: Asking. Shows extras.

3♦: exactly 4♠, 5+♦.

3NT: To play.

 

It was a club Swiss Teams game, and I felt brave... I think the match was in a suspect place... So I punted. My hand was:

 

J7

AQ

AKXX

AJ87X

 

I see this hand the same sort of way, a known fit... or at least... I knew, no one else did. A suspect suit, but, it's probably okay, and the opportunity for opponents to make mistakes without information. Sometimes 3NT is just best in these circumstances.

[fromageGB]

It seems I am in a minority here, but I agree with ...

 

If you *know* you have 3 hearts each, then of course game is clearly worth bidding - but of course neither of you knows the other has 3, so all of the cases when the opponents have 8 hearts come into play as well.

 

If the 1♦ open is not balanced it could well be that opener has nowhere to go after 3NT, and OP was just plain lucky. My opponents tend to lead the suit in which they are long and have top cards against a NT contract, whether or not you show a weakness.