[HeartA]

Scoring: IMP

East opened weak 2D and South overcalled 3NT

---

Bidding went:
East South West North
(2♦) 3NT pass 4♦
pass 4♥ pass 4♠
4NT Pass Pass Pass

Who was more responsible for the missing slam?

[Impact]

Although it is not completely clear to me it appears that South initially marginally overstressed his playing strength by bidding 3NT (which could have been based on a long running or semisolid minor) and North was paranoid about such a possibility - to the extent that he distorted his relative lengths in the majors to avoid going to the 5-level.

I assume that 4D was a transfer (and that 4C over 3NT would have been some form of Stayman). You have not specified methods in use.

I also note that the 4NT bid was consistent with a hand based on the long running (or semisolid) minor assuming that was within partnership style - whatever it may have meant.

In any event I would not have been unhappy to risk the 5-level opposite a jump to 3NT with the North hand - albeit my C support (for partner's putative running minor is less than it might be!).

For that reason alone assuming that a transfer to S and then bidding H was available this hand is clearly worth such a bid (albeit query what a direct bid of 5D over 3NT meant systemically: it should be pick a Major with equal length, so that the inference from transferring and bidding a new suit at the higher level is length disparity; the extent of teh length disparity also depends on the meaning ascribed to a direct 4S over 3NT which should still be for minors, and a delayed 4S after Stayman- assuming non-Puppet- which should be 5S & 4H IMHO).

Hence, merely having the agreements of transfers to Majors and Stayman would have allowed North to bid the hand better.

It is not clear to me that South appreciated the dual nature ofhis 3NT bid - and the regressive nature of 4NT (which for all I know he meant as 6ABw or some such - although it should be regressive).

THe greatest problem is that North misdescribed his hand twice fearing a particular South hand (which on his cards we could all understand), but I would have had more sympathy with some distortion to keep the bidding level lower had he been an A weaker!!

Sometimes you just have to bid out your hand and if you catch partner with the marginal worst hand possible andyou go off -so be it.

It is as bad at imps to bid as if partner always holds the marginally worst hand for his bidding (opposite your hand) as to always assume he has perfect cards for his bidding - opposite your hand.

The blame may be ascribed:-

system (since unstated) 10+% as we don't know what the agreements were and hence precisely what inferences could be drawn from the particualr sequence utilised (as opposed to others putatively available)

North 70+% for showing neither his pattern nor his strength and infact distorting his pattern which could have been even worse

South 20% for the 4NT bid which is bad under almost any circumstances (2 quick D stoppers and TRICKS with no losers on the auction) 3 card support for the long major shown (H) and good cards KTx for the second suit. So long as the specified sequence was a potential slam try the 4NT bid was awful on this sequence when it might have been ,made on Qxx A Kx AKQJxxx or weaker hands eg xxx x Kx AKQJxxx would be reasonable from my perspective or even more HCP but less suitability eg DKQX or KJx etc

[joker_gib]

With north's (monumental) hand I can't imagine not playing slam when my partner overcalls 3NT

Start with 4♦ and then RKCB or 5♣ if you are afraid of ♦ control

Alain

[Fluffy]

South's 3NT started the trouble, all the blame for him.

[luke warm]

i don't understand the 3NT bid, 2NT seems fine... i also don't understand north's last pass... i'll say 70/30 north

[adhoc3]

North did a good job until the last pass. What is it? Being upset with pd's inaction?

[joker_gib]

joker_gib, on Oct 17 2005, 11:18 AM, said:

With north's (monumental) hand I can't imagine not playing slam when my partner overcalls 3NT

Well, I responded a little bit too fast ! I only took into account the case of a big balanced hand.

Of course this much looks like long ♣ and a ♦ stopper. So most of the blame has to go to South.

Alain

[mikestar]

X is much better than 3NT, which should be a running suit with a shot at 9 tricks.

This is would be a harder problem if the opening were 3♦.

Amalya Kearse gives a useful convention for responding to a 3NT overcall in Bridge Conventions Complete: Advancer's 4♣ asks for hand type. Overcaller bids 4NT with a normal balanced hand, bids his suit with the running suit, or cuebids the enemy suit with a balanced battleship.

[Trpltrbl]

I blame the 3 NT bid, it takes a lot of room away here.
And it isn't even a 3 NT bid.

GBB

[junyi_zhu]

HeartA, on Oct 17 2005, 06:31 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

East opened weak 2D and South overcalled 3NT

---

Bidding went:
East South West North
(2♦) 3NT pass 4♦
pass 4♥ pass 4♠
4NT Pass Pass Pass

Who was more responsible for the missing slam?

nobody's fault i think. n-s just have no good gadget over the 3nt overcall.
If they play the acceptance of the transfer to show fit, then it would be a piece of cake
for north to bid the slam. 3NT is aggressive, but reasonable, the 5th club and right sided AQ often provides some good play in 3NT. You only need CAxx Hxxxx SQxx Dxxx from partner to have a good play in 3nt, and partner wouldn't raise you if you only bid 2NT.

[Trpltrbl]

junyi_zhu, on Oct 17 2005, 02:46 PM, said:

You only need CAxx Hxxxx SQxx Dxxx from partner to have a good play in 3nt, and partner wouldn't raise you if you only bid 2NT.

Only ?
That is providing the ♣ break, the ♦ K is onside and the ♥ behave.
Pretty specific.
And if you double and after pd's bid you bid 2NT, doesn't that show this hand ?

GBB

[HeartA]

I was South. I agree that 3N was a little over bid (x and then 2N, if possible, might be better). But my acceptance of 4H transfer and no mention of ♣ suit (assume my 3NT was based on it) indicate I had a balanced hand, better than direct 2NT.

Anyway, I wouldn't pass 4NT holding North's powerful 2 majors.

[Chamaco]

The 3NT is confusing for North:
3NT does NOT guarantee a balanced hand but it can be based on a long running club suit, and from North's perspective it is likely that South has solid clubs and a diamond stopper, in which case probing for a major suit slam is very risky.

So my blame goes 95% to South and 5% to N.

With South, I'd have bid 2NT which I play (15+)16-18.
This is a slight underbid (this 18 count is great), but IMO more practical.

The alternative would be double then 3NT, which does full justice to the hand strength but makes the auction slightly awkward..

[Free]

South's 3NT bid is destructive for his own bidding. A simple 2NT or Dbl followed by 2NT shows the hand he has. If he gives a wrong picture of his hand, how can North evaluate what he has. Ok, his bids aren't great as well, but if you have to start finding Major fits at 4-level, then the only one to blaim is the player who got them at that height. It's not East's fault, so it's South.

[Echognome]

Just to bring up a related topic. Suppose it had gone (3♦) - 3NT - (P) - ?. Some might now have more sympathy for South. Now North has a problem as there are lots of hand types that South can bid 3NT on. Here having methods to extract this information can be quite useful. One of our better local pairs told me of this method:

(3m) - 3NT - (P) - ?

4♣* - Why did you bid 3NT?
4♦ - Transfer to hearts
4♥ - Transfer to spades
4♠ - Transfer to other minor
4NT - Simple Blackwood (since quantitative raises go through 4♣)

* After (3m) - 3NT - (P) - 4♣ - (P) - ?
4♦ - I had a long solid heart suit and a stop
4♥ - I had a long solid spade suit and a stop
4♠ - I had a long solid minor and a stop
4NT - I am strong balanced but min (say 17-19)
5♣ - I am strong balanced but max (say 20-23)

The treatment varies slightly over (3M) - 3NT, but the only real difference is that you won't be transferring to their major. And before it is asked, yes they bid 3NT on a solid major and a stop.

[Kalvan14]

3N is a horrible bid: does not describe the hand (it gives more the impression of being based on a long, running ♣ suit, rater than a balanced strong hand).

I am quite surprised that 4♦ is regarded as a transfer to ♥: in my view, it was a forcing bid, asking to choose between ♥ and ♠.

N has his own share of guilt: the pass over 4N (which was kind of a tricky bid in any case) is at better very shy

[HeartA]

Kalvan14, on Oct 31 2005, 10:28 PM, said:

I am quite surprised that 4♦ is regarded as a transfer to ♥: in my view, it was a forcing bid, asking to choose between ♥ and ♠.

Actually, I was not sure of 4♦, cue or transfer. And my 4♥ couldn't be wrong: if 4♦ were transfer, 4♥ showed acceptance; if 4♦ were cue-bid, 4♥ showed ♥A. Over my pd's 4♠, I think I had obligation to keep the bidding going. I didn't wnat to bid 5♣ for 2 reasons: 1) No Ace in ♣, 2) didn't want to give pd's impression I had a solid ♣ suit.

[Kalvan14]

HeartA, on Nov 1 2005, 12:23 AM, said:

Kalvan14, on Oct 31 2005, 10:28 PM, said:

I am quite surprised that 4♦ is regarded as a transfer to ♥: in my view, it was a forcing bid, asking to choose between ♥ and ♠.

Actually, I was not sure of 4♦, cue or transfer. And my 4♥ couldn't be wrong: if 4♦ were transfer, 4♥ showed acceptance; if 4♦ were cue-bid, 4♥ showed ♥A. Over my pd's 4♠, I think I had obligation to keep the bidding going. I didn't wnat to bid 5♣ for 2 reasons: 1) No Ace in ♣, 2) didn't want to give pd's impression I had a solid ♣ suit.

Ok, I understand your worries, even if I am still surprised 4♦ meaning can be in doubt. 4N is a very misleading bid, though.
You can play all the suits, with the only exception of ♦, or NT. What about bidding 5♦ (my preference) or 5♠?