[neilkaz]

geller, on Dec 31 2006, 12:54 AM, said:

The initial problem didn't specify the scoring (or if it did I missed it, sorry), but having read to this point I assume it's matchpoints rather than imps. If that's the case pass is somewhat more attractive. (I still bid 4♠ though.) No reason to necessarily suppose 3NT is a better game contract, although obviously there are some hands where that could be the case.

If you really want to answer this question, get a hand-generator and deal out 100 18-19 balanced raises to 3♠ and then see which of 3♠, 4♠, or 3NT is best. (I'm too lazy to try this myself.....)

-Bob

Yes...but even with a hand generator you have to make a decision as to whether the 3♠ bidder will pull 3NT to 4♠ anyhow with a 4-4 fit. Simply bidding 3NT here doesn't end the auction, but says to PD that 3NT may be a better contract than 4♠.

[mikestar]

I'm a 3NT bidder here, though there is a limit to how much I'd disagree with a partner who gambled a pass, especially at match points.

I can see merit in hiding the horrible spades by responding 1NT and missing the 4-4 fit--which we won't miss if partner is unbalanced and strong enough to try for game, as he will bid 2♠ to show the strength and pattern out. In that case I raise spades gladly.

[neilkaz]

mikestar, on Dec 31 2006, 11:26 PM, said:

I'm a 3NT bidder here, though there is a limit to how much I'd disagree with a partner who gambled a pass, especially at match points.

I can see merit in hiding the horrible spades by responding 1NT and missing the 4-4 fit--which we won't miss if partner is unbalanced and strong enough to try for game, as he will bid 2♠ to show the strength and pattern out. In that case I raise spades gladly.

The reason to not hide even these weak ♠ here is that you are not 4333 and PD may also be slightly unbalanced and that if he invites to game you can bid 3NT to accept if you wish to give him a choice. This does risk him blasting to 4♠ when it is -1 and 3NT makes, but I still think 1♠ offers better chances both at part scores and games.

If PD jumps to 3NT holding 4♠ after your 1NT, perhaps it is set on a red suit lead.

Just my opinion and if 4333 here with these weak ♠ I'd likely call 1N.

[kenrexford]

Ditto thoughts on 3NT as bad, with some underlining.

IMO, the use of 3NT as a slam-approach tool in the jump-raise-of-responder's-major scenario is more important than the fine-tuning of contract. I would like to be able to offer a choice, but it seems to me that this choice must be made when electing 1♠ or 1NT, else this auction is preemted too much for the GF responder.

[awm]

If the 3♠ bid really shows 18-19 balanced with 4-card support, that's a pretty precisely described hand. I don't think there's a lot of value in having a "serious/non-serious" slam try distinction, which is mostly useful when both hands are very wide-ranging.

On the other hand, it's nice to be able to avoid 4♠ with a pair of 4333 hands for example, or with a variety of other hands (like lots of slow values) where 3NT will play better. Generally finding the best game should take priority over slam bidding.

I also disagree that offering 3NT as a choice means we should've responded 1NT initially. Take the following two hands for opener:

Jxxx
AKx
KJx
AQJ

KQJx
Kx
Kxx
AQxx

Both of these are reasonable 1♣ openings and 3♠ rebids, yet the first will almost always fail in 4♠ (losing 3♠+1♦ even with spades 3-2) whereas 3NT will normally make (just concede a diamond, unless spades are breaking 4-1 with AKQT in one hand and the diamond ace in the other, and they find a spade switch). On the second hand, 4♠ will often make (losing a spade and two red tricks) whereas 3NT will frequently fail on a red suit lead.

Bidding 1♠ and then offering 3NT shows a hand with four spades but more suited for notrump play, and allows partner to make a reasonable choice. Bidding 1NT initially takes it out of partner's hands.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

4S

Either pass or 4S, playing MP
pass is certainly an real option,
playing IMP's 4S is clear cut.

You have a 8 card mayor suit fit,
play the mayor.

I would play 3NT as serious, certainly
not an option in this part of the forum,
but I wont recommend, that B/I try
choice of games either.

Playing 3NT as some kind of serious 3NT,
means for me, I have a bid, which allows
me, to make a waiting bid, asking opener
to describe his hand further.
The agreement mayor suit fit found, play
the mayor, is also simple, avoiding
misunderstandings, which can be quite expensive.

With kind regards
Marlowe