[eagles123]

---

I know "play strong NT" is the easy answer

but what is the best way to bid over 3S to find either 6N or 6D?

[ahydra]

3NT by South is more than reasonable. This is somewhat unlucky - sometimes pre-empts work.

What other calls could South make?

Pass - out of the question with such a strong hand, since partner might well pass with 3NT cold. As it happens, partner will reopen and South can pretty much just punt the slam at that point, but to hope partner will reopen is a heck of a gamble.

Double looks weird, but keeps the bidding low. Works well on this hand since North would probably pass and pick up 1100. If partner takes it out, he can clarify his shape, but pretty much rules out any ability to play in NT. The form of scoring makes a difference here - at IMPs you don't mind playing 5D if partner has two or three of them with you, but at pairs you really want to be in 3NT.

4D - risks running into a huge misfit, but is most descriptive. Here North will drive to slam (but needs to check for spade control - how to do that since 4H sounds natural? I'll leave that to those with better meta-rules about high level auctions)

5D - eats a lot of room and rules out any grand slam if partner had the right cards. I think South is too strong for this.

One last thing - could North consider an invitational 4NT? He has nice controls and, as we've seen, partner is cramped for room so may have more strength than the usual 12-15 or so that you would normally bid 3NT with over a lower-level overcall.

I must admit I would pick 3NT all the time playing pairs. Playing teams I'd likely opt for 4D but it's close.

ahydra

[Trinidad]

- In the field, many will play a strong NT. They will have it easier on this hand.
- Of those that play a weak NT, many would open this hand 1♦. They will also have it easier on this hand.

This simply means that you need to bid really well on this hand to get an average result.

I must admit that I have little experience playing weak NT, but I have the feeling that South could have bid 4NT instead of 3NT to invite a slam. (Ahydra only considers whether North should bid 4NT.)

Rik

[ahydra]

 Trinidad, on 2013-October-14, 09:06, said:

- In the field, many will play a strong NT. They will have it easier on this hand.
- Of those that play a weak NT, many would open this hand 1♦. They will also have it easier on this hand.

This simply means that you need to bid really well on this hand to get an average result.

I must admit that I have little experience playing weak NT, but I have the feeling that South could have bid 4NT instead of 3NT to invite a slam. (Ahydra only considers whether North should bid 4NT.)

Rik

For the majority of partnerships, particularly in this forum, I would think 4NT (when not preceded by another natural NT bid) would be some sort of Blackwood. (At a higher level I agree - there's no need for a Blackwood 4NT in this position since you can first agree clubs with 4C - but this is N/B)

ahydra

[eagles123]

 Trinidad, on 2013-October-14, 09:06, said:

- In the field, many will play a strong NT. They will have it easier on this hand.
- Of those that play a weak NT, many would open this hand 1♦. They will also have it easier on this hand.

This simply means that you need to bid really well on this hand to get an average result.

I must admit that I have little experience playing weak NT, but I have the feeling that South could have bid 4NT instead of 3NT to invite a slam. (Ahydra only considers whether North should bid 4NT.)

Rik

Thanks, but just a quick point, in the field pretty much everyone plays a Weak NT

[aguahombre]

 Trinidad, on 2013-October-14, 09:06, said:

- Of those that play a weak NT, many would open this hand 1♦. They will also have it easier on this hand.

If I am counting to 13 correctly, they might have an easier run to 6D down one. Opening Spade ruff and another diamond loser? The 1♣ openers seem to have a better shot at 6NT or at 6♦ from the other side.

[billw55]

3NT is reasonable. At these colors, double is tempting, it would depend on your agreements.

Sometimes preempts work. Stop resulting yourself

[Lorne50]

 ahydra, on 2013-October-14, 08:29, said:

I must admit I would pick 3NT all the time playing pairs. Playing teams I'd likely opt for 4D but it's close.

Another possible thing to consider is opener raising 3N to 4N (which must be natural). It is a bit aggressive but it would be unlucky if 9 tricks was the limit and he knows that partner will be under pressure with few options to invite a slam and stop at a sensible spot if he has a balanced 16/17 count.

[TylerE]

Would be nice if south could double for penalties. That's the real to keep people from making crappy preempts against you.

[akwoo]

Warning: I'm thinking in a Kaplan-Sheinwold type context, but it shouldn't be that different.

At IMPs, where playing in 5 of a minor isn't so bad, I bid 4♦. Assuming East is sane, at these colors, you have an 8 card fit in some minor.

At MPs, I think 3N is the practical bid. The most likely hands for partner are 1435 or 1336 13-ish-count on which 3N scores better than 5 of either minor. With such a hand, I don't see how partner bails out in 4N over 4♦. Maybe you have agreements that let you do that.

[Cascade]

 ahydra, on 2013-October-14, 09:15, said:

For the majority of partnerships, particularly in this forum, I would think 4NT (when not preceded by another natural NT bid) would be some sort of Blackwood. (At a higher level I agree - there's no need for a Blackwood 4NT in this position since you can first agree clubs with 4C - but this is N/B)

ahydra

Its not clear to me that in any partnership without a special agreement that 4♣ would be forcing. Nor do i think that it is best played that way.

What do you do with a few values and some club support?

[P_Marlowe]

For starters you could try to go for blood.
If I got it right, we are green, they are red.

I have AKJ in their suit, a partner who opened the bidding,
a good opening bid as well.
Going for blood will give us 500-800, i.e. I will beat all,
that stop in game.
If I get 1100, we will even beat those in small slam.

X by South is not a penalty double, but neg. / optional, but
partner will quite often let it stay.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[eagles123]

thanks folks for help

[mycroft]

if double is penalties, you could try it.

Otherwise, I tend to assume that partner has a strong NT (maybe offshape) when they open 1m. Like akwoo, this comes from a K/S background where minor openings are sound (we include the "overstrength weak 2" in there, but otherwise, we should have shape or strength). If partner has the strong NT, then we have at least slam try strength, and I don't think I can afford to bid a "partner will pass" 3NT.

I don't know what I'm bidding - if I bid 4♦, can I get out in 4NT? If partner has the "overstrength weak 2", am I happy in 5♣? But I'm making a forward-going call.

Having said all that, I, too, would open 1♦ with the North hand - and I hope the 3♠ call veers partner to NT to avoid the immediate spade ruff.

[eagles123]

quick question, a couple of posters have said opening 1D is what they would do/better than 1C, why?

[aguahombre]

 eagles123, on 2013-October-15, 10:26, said:

quick question, a couple of posters have said opening 1D is what they would do/better than 1C, why?

That is not a quick question. The two camps won't ever agree, and we have been over it before.

The 1C camp says we aren't going to rebid the other minor anyway, but rather 1NT. So we open the lower to give more room; we have more good things that can happen in an uncontested auction after 1C. For instance, give responder X KXX XXX QJXXXX. She can't bid 2C/1D. But Reverse those minors and she can bid 1D/1C ---If the opening bid hits responder's minor, neither camp matters.

The 1D camp seems to emphasize the nebulous nature of 1C and prefers to show 4 Diamonds; but they still don't accomplish that if 1D might be 4-4-3-2. They can offset by opening 1C on those, but that creates uncertainty as well. The 1D camp might be better placed when the opponents intervene, but we haven't noticed (or don't choose to notice ) much damage from interference which was caused by our 1C choice.

Then, there are people who just open 1D because someone published it that way --without explaining why. Others must open 1D because of systemic issues and inferences which I can't explain, but they can.

[eagles123]

thanks AguaHombre, the one thing I'd say to everyone is seriously this is not a great level, put it this way i'm probably one of the strongest players lol so for example opening 1D here because others might be playing a system that requires them to open 1D rather than 1C isn't even really a consideration as everyone plays Acol

[billw55]

 eagles123, on 2013-October-15, 11:53, said:

thanks AguaHombre, the one thing I'd say to everyone is seriously this is not a great level, put it this way i'm probably one of the strongest players lol

Well, east's vulnerable preemptive overcall on a Q9 high suit gave us a hint about him at least.

[TylerE]

 eagles123, on 2013-October-15, 11:53, said:

thanks AguaHombre, the one thing I'd say to everyone is seriously this is not a great level, put it this way i'm probably one of the strongest players lol s

Find a better bridge club, seriously. Playing against nothing but bumbling fools will only instill bad habits that will be hard to break later.

[Zelandakh]

 eagles123, on 2013-October-15, 10:26, said:

quick question, a couple of posters have said opening 1D is what they would do/better than 1C, why?

Take your North hand from the OP and say for a moment that the bidding runs: 1m - (1♠) - X - (P). If you opened 1♣ then you have little choice now other than to rebid 1NT. That means that the 1NT rebid essentially says nothing about spades. If you opened 1♦ then you also have the option of a 2♣ rebid. It is just a question of where you think the definition is more useful. Most Standard structures think the better definition of a 1NT rebid is more important and recommend opening 1♦. Unbalanced diamond users think the benefits from the extra definition of the whole 1♦ opening more than offset any losses here. Opening 1♣ with 3244 but still opening 1♦ with some other balanced hands seems to me to be getting the short end of both sticks - but many systems (including Acol) choose to open the 3343 hand 1♦. I suspect that has more to do with tradition than with any intrinsic merit.