[1eyedjack]

---

MP, best hand south, instant, pro gib 30

Trusting that my having a point to spare for the 1N opener does not qualify this as a "joke" post, I am interested to know whether you think it can ever be right, at any vul or any form of scoring, to sacrifice at the 4 level with a 3-3-4-3 shape and 4 HCP opposite a 1N opener.

Which, incidentally, netted 60.7% but only because opps forgot to double.

[ArtK78]

I won't say "ever," but very rarely would be accurate. And I would not make the bid in the hopes that this was one of those rare instances.

You could have done a trick better in the play as it turns out, but that is a quibble.

[1eyedjack]

ArtK78, on 2014-August-25, 09:40, said:

You may have been able to do a trick better in the play as it turns out (depending on the defense), but that is a quibble.

At D/D, there is no point at which I am on play where I have an option to go fewer than 3 down, and no point at which defence are on play where they have an option to take it more than 3 down. Possibly at single dummy (or if I alone was playing double dummy) I could have given them a losing option, but interested to know what you have in mind.

[ArtK78]

1eyedjack, on 2014-August-25, 10:00, said:

At D/D, there is no point at which I am on play where I have an option to go fewer than 3 down, and no point at which defence are on play where they have an option to take it more than 3 down. Possibly at single dummy (or if I alone was playing double dummy) I could have given them a losing option, but interested to know what you have in mind.

When you played the trump A and saw the 10 appear on your left, you could have played that to be a singleton. Now, drive out the top diamonds as you did, unblocking from hand. The defense may be able to score a heart ruff - but if they do not, you can pick up the trump suit for one loser. In any event, you are no worse off.

[Bbradley62]

The description of 3♣ is also suspect: I'd want it to show 5♣, not 5-♣, which also eliminates the possibility of having 5 in any other suit.

[1eyedjack]

Bbradley62, on 2014-August-26, 10:17, said:

The description of 3♣ is also suspect: I'd want it to show 5♣, not 5-♣, which also eliminates the possibility of having 5 in any other suit.

Heh, heh. I shall refrain ...

[georgi]

Bbradley62, on 2014-August-26, 10:17, said:

The description of 3♣ is also suspect: I'd want it to show 5♣, not 5-♣, which also eliminates the possibility of having 5 in any other suit.

That would be improved in v31.

So when 1NT person is bidding own suit in similar auction ( partner is silent ) it will say 5cards and not 5-.

Also aside suits would be reduced to some balanced length instead of 2-5 elsewhere.

I.e. 3♣ here would show : -- 5 ♣; 2-3 ♦; 2-4 ♥; 2-4 ♠; 17 HCP; 18- total points