[pigpenz]

I voted for 4NT, didnt think that there was any way to beat 4♠x enough to make up for vul game. at5♦ the king is most likely worthless. Granted there may be some mis interpetation of 4NT, we do have 75% of the cards and 4NT should be ok, and if partner mininterpets then there is still a chance we migh tland on our feet.

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Sep 21 2005, 05:08 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Sep 21 2005, 10:03 AM, said:

inquiry, on Sep 21 2005, 04:52 PM, said:

This one is back to the Brazilian Team Championships semi-finals, where Oliveria overcalled 1NT with 4♠, and Amoeda was faced with this problem.  The choice at the table was 4NT, which I thought was "wrong" and hence the problem.

Once again, a link would be nice to see the hands in question...

Once again, I don't think the actual hand is of that much interest to the problem. On the other hand, of course, choosing vugraph hands was done on purpose to provide some extra excitement (and since one of the hands was BETO's and then he joined the panel, it added even an extra level of interest).

Anyway, here is the hand... please try not to let the actual hand influence your thoughts on what the bids should mean and what action you should take... The hand was board 12

Bra. Team Trial, semi-final 3

I think that looking at the actual hands is interesting since it provides some perspective regarding how different bids might have worked out.

Martinez chose to bid 4NT. Presumably this was for takeout. Machado bid 4♦ which was the best possible response to hear. Martinez happily passed. 5♦ rolled home.

If we look at the actual hands here a couple points stand out:

1. What agree did Martinez and Machado actually have about 4NT? More specifically, what would a 5♦ rebid show over a 5♣ advance? I'm having trouble believing that they were using 4NT as a two suited takeout...

2. Look what happens if we switch Chagas's Ace of Clubs with the Ace of Spades. in this case, the defense starts with Spade to the Ace followed by a Spade ruff. At this point in time, the 5♦ contract hinges on the same Club hook as 6N... As I noted earlier, steering the hand towards a Diamond contract doesn't make much sense...

Admittedly, we're looking at a VERY narrow sample, but it still helps illustrate some basic points

[whereagles]

Dbl. Bridge is a guessing game.. lol.

[Rebound]

I believe I went with 5♦, just for the record, but i'm easily convinced double is theoretically better.

[Double !]

I elected to bid 4NT- to bid what I think we can make.
Ignorance is bliss: wasn't aware that the expert interpretation of 4NT in this situation is minor 2-suiter (certainly not without prior agreement), and I am not sure that it should be. It seems to me that I should have the option available to me to bid the contract that I suspect will have the best play. I am very concerned about the possibility of not being able to make 5, much less 6 diamonds, and 6NT seems like taking an outright view on the hand. Oh, well.

[han]

Don, I expect that there is no such thing as expert agreement on what 4NT means.

[pigpenz]

hrothgar, on Sep 21 2005, 07:11 AM, said:

Preempts work. You don't have remotely enough space to explore intelligently and its folly to pretend that you do. I'm feeling optimistic today, so I'm bidding 6N and hoping for the best...

that makes it more likely that you would want to make 4NT to play.

1NT 2♠ double
1NT 3♠ double

likewise
2NT 3major double

of these 3 cases i would only play the first as penalty. The last two would fall more into the line as negative doubles. Saying partner we have the points but dont know for sure where we belong. So what do we discuss with partner when we make out a card about these auctions.

Now would the opps bid on a hand that they can beat 3nt off the top on? Most good opps wouldnt.

so if we have discussed it even an auction like
1nt 4♠ double pass

could still be pulled to 4NT but ???

[inquiry]

For the last three hands, Canadian expert Mike Hargreaves joins the panel (and hopefully for all future contest). Welcome Mike.

As noted above, 4NT was bid as natural at the table. I didn’t think a natural 4NT was an option here. Neither did a number of the posters (Fred, Justin and Richie for instance). While others thought 4NT was natural, (flytoox and Sergey). Let’s start with the 4NT bidders, as they had so little to say (if natural, I would say “wtp”?)

Sergey D. 4N - natural.

Flytoox 4N. I think 4N is to play. However this is not very clear. A good discussing point.

For those who can’t bid 4NT as natural, the choices were DBL, 5♦ and 6♦. Each bid had some outstanding support.

FRED DBL – If I thought 4NT was natural, I would choose that call, but I personally think 4NT *should* be for takeout and I think it is likely that most experts would agree. 5D could easily be right, but it is not unlikely that it will be down on a ruff. Meanwhile, I expect to collect a reasonable penalty most of the time defending 4S doubled. This is a close call, but my judgment suggests that defending is the percentage action. The identity and mannerisms of my RHO would likely influence my decision at the table.

Justin Dbl . Very hard hand. 5D could be right, but I will take the sure cash. I would interpret 4N as showing two places to play here, not natural. I'm worried that in 5D they will start with spade-spade ruff, and then 5D may go down. I expect to usually get 300 or 500 with a X which I don't want to jeopardize.

Roland Double. 5D doesn't look right. RHO must have 8 spades for his vulnerable leap to 4S without the king, and then the first two tricks will be spade to the ace, spade ruff. Do we have the rest now? Maybe, but then declarer is unlikely to get more than his 7 spade tricks. I will take the money (hopefully 500) instead of a questionable 600.

The most popular bid was the “bid what you think you can make” school of 5♦. These players oten worried about the possible ♠A and ♠ ruff. but saw (reasonably) little other choie. I have to admit that I would have gone with 5♦ as well.

Beto 5♦. It would be nice if we could know the style of the preemptor. Without much information and in this vul., i bid what i think i can make.

MikeH 5♦ LHO may be unable to lead a ♠, or partner may hold the A. 4N is too ambiguous, slam remote, unwilling to defend.

Luis 5d: A difficult judgment problem. I don't have many options over 4s so I'mgoing to bid a contract that I know has a play. 6d is an option. Both 3NTand 6d can work on some layouts I think 5d is the best option in average.

Fluffy 5♦, even if only 1 ace is missing, it could easilly be ♠A+♠ruff, so 5♦ rates to be our best chancee of scoring high. Sure we can go down, but I don't think 4♠ is more than 300.

Reisig I'd play 4NT here as two suited (not natural)...do I have a real choice? 5D

Ng: 5♦ The only danger is the spade ruff, but we can still survive this bad luck.
Slam (6D) would be bad contract due for spade ruff, 6NT would be doubtful
and dangerous also, so forget it. Penalty double is not effective here, see
the vulnerability.

Then, finally, Henri showed his free spirit again.

ritong 6nt i know, i am a wild punter :-) now, assuming overcaller has AQJxxxxx, my part looks at ♠xx, so no way he drives on if i bid 4nt or 5!♦. what could slow me down is the ♥ lead could be killer, but i trust my rho to deduce i hold ♠king and lead ♠ace in any case.

This I thought was the most difficult hand of the set. The possibility of the spade ruff is bothersome for 5♦. 4♠X doesn’t look like the road to riches, and 4NT not being natural (for most players) makes bidding it unrealistic (at least to the majority of the panel). There seems to be no “good” answer, anything might work well, or horribly. So really, everyone probably should get the same score no matter what they voted...but here, the panel votes rule.

Scores
5♦ 100
DBL 80
4NT 60
6NT 40

[mike777]

Yuck. Ya, 4nt should be 2 suit takeout not natural..never entered my mind, rats.

At least I thought 5d was a very close second, via FTL.

[pigpenz]

but that is the point of the problem why does 4NT have to be takeout, unless you have discussed it. There are probably just as many hands where it is right to bid 4NT as takeout as there is to take 4NT to play. The problem points out that at high levels you need to decide which one you want to play. Cause as I had posted earlier most people arent going to bid on a suit that they think they can beat 3nt on.

[pigpenz]

thats the point of the problem

If you run the hand through a simulator and startlooking at the results that are possible, the points in partners hand that let 5♦ make are usually the same ones that let 4NT make. The only difference that 5♦ is more prone to a second round spade ruff.

So now I need to run the south west hands through a simulator and see what comes up with the north hand. Hands more likely to be able to play 4nt or hands more suited to use 4nt as a two suited takeout. Will let you know when i get a couple of hundred hands done

[inquiry]

pigpenz, on Sep 22 2005, 12:48 PM, said:

thats the point of the problem

At the table, the player with this hand bid a natural 4NT. I didn't think that bid was possible without expressed agreement (in otherwords, I thought expert opinion would be, if undiscussed 4NT would be two places to play --- by the way, this does not exclude hearts as one of the two places).

I think the poll clearly indicates that, indeed, experts play it this way. See comments by,

Fred, Justin, and rich. Roland while not addressing this question was hoping for all the tricks in diamonds after ♠A and ♠ ruff, so it is clear he thinks 4NT is not natural as well. I think most of the 5♦ and all the Doublers would bid 4NT if they believed it to be natural.

Of course it would be great if it was legal to bid 4NT and add the words "to play" to it... if only the rules would let you!!!

[han]

Pigpenz,

You say good opponents won't bid 4S on 7 pr 8 solid spades or KQJ-8th and a side ace, because they can beat 3NT. I don't buy this. How likely is it that the opponents will land in 3NT? I think that it is much more likely that the opponents find their heart fit, and a later 4S bid over 4H won't have quite the same effect.

[Walddk]

I agree that 4NT should be two places to play. Opener will treat it as minors. With diamonds and hearts responder will correct 5♣ to 5♦, with clubs and hearts, he will pull 5♦ to 5♥.

How many have the agreement that 4NT is natural on this auction? My guess is very few.

Roland

[luis]

Do you want to have some fun?

Yesterday my pd and I played f2f bridge against one of our internationalist pairs, in fact a pair that will play the bermuda bowl for our country in October.

The following auction occurred:

me Int1 pd Int2
3♠ - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT

At this point Int2 in my side of the screen told in a loud voice "This is uniscussed" without even alerting or anything.
I raised an eyebrow, bid pass and passed the tray.

me Int1 pd Int2
pass - 5♦ - pass - 5♥

In his side of the screen pd asked Internationalist number 1 about the 5♦ bid, the conversation was:
Pd: "What id 5♦?"
Int1: "Depends on what 4NT is"
Pd: "And what is 4NT?"
Int1: "Can be blackwood or two suiter"
Pd: "And which one it is?"
Int1: "I don't know"
Pd: "And how can you then bid 5♦?"
Int1: "....."
Pd: "Please tell me"
Int1: "....."

The hand ended in 5♥ making, I felt abused and insulted for both the behavious and the incredible explanations.
Up to now I can't determine if they are short of grey matter and really think what they explained or if they are just bad people trying to confuse opponents.

[luis]

Jlall, on Sep 22 2005, 06:18 PM, said:

OK...I'll bite...what was wrong with the explanations? If 4N is undiscussed then 5D is obviously not systemic. He even told you the 2 possible meanings of 4N, but he wasn't sure which. Why was this wrong?

First of all because it's not ethical to announce "Undiscussed" out loud.
The second problem was that 5♦ was alerted.
Then I think you can't bid 5♦ and alert without telling pd if you are answering blackwood or picking your best minor. The explanation "depends on what 4NT is" doesn't make any sense. I mean if you don't know what 4NT is and pd doesn't know what 5♦ is what the hell is going on ?