[Badmonster]

I held this hand :

Scoring: IMP

---

The bidding went P 1♠ p 1NT p 2♦ p 3♠ p 3nt p 4♠


My logic (and you're all free to point out how faulty it is) was that if p didn't hold points in clubs we might have a slam. Now, I'm certainly open to comments and criticism on the thought proccess and my bidding here, but I would also like to know this:
How do we, in an auction like this, explore the quality of side suits?

(I thought of my 3nt as serious, my p thought is was confusing as we hadn't agreed to play serious nt. And I suspect that even with agreement I didn't have a good enough hand for serious 3nt.)

[pbleighton]

Thoughts:

1. Never play a convention without discussing it with your partner first

2. You don't have room for the exploration of side suits. Bids after 3S should be cueing first round controls, if in different suits. A rebid of your second suit might show slam interest and a strong suit.

3. This hand isn't strong enough for slam invitation opposite an invite with (presumably) 3 card support, especially since it is likely that pd has some club values. Just bid 4S, and don't be upset to miss an occasional slam with 27 hcp and a 5-3 fit.

Peter

[Badmonster]

Peter, I suspect you're right on all accounts. Thanks.

[Winstonm]

This is another reason I dislike the forcing 1N 3-card limit raise, as this auction is better used as a choice of contracts than serious.

I see a bit of "magic handing" in trying for slam with these cards, as partner would have to hold a "perfect maximum" for his bidding to make slam viable. My theory is that a hand is not worth a slam try unless slam is virtually cold if partner holds the "perfect minimum" - remember, slam tries sometimes get you to a 5-level stop and nothing is worse than bidding a 10-trick hand to the 5-level and going down in search for a dubious slam.

There are 4 losers to cover, and partner's more likely to hold club cards than precisely the right heart/diamond cards - I guess you could construct something like this: Jxx, AJ10, AJ, xxxxx which gets to about a 50% slam, but that to me is the upper end of the limit raise.

If the opening hand were: AKxxxx, KQx, AQx, x, then there is the potential for partner to hold a "perfect minimum" of Qxx, AJx, K10xx, xxx.

[Badmonster]

Yeah, there's optimistic and their unrealistic. I agree the second adjective better applies to my handling of that hand. It's a good point.

[Stephen Tu]

As others have said you are just too far away to try for slam.

Also, I think I have seen a tendency on these boards for overuse of serious 3nt, looking for it to apply in situations where it makes little sense. Especially on this auction, you have only 8 cd fit & possibly flat hands facing each other, 3nt is going to be your best spot to play reasonably often!

Serious 3nt is a tool for use when both opener & responder are practically unlimited, and one wants to be able to cue in case partner happens to have substantial extra values. And also be able to show substantial extras, instead of just "I'm cueing just in case you have extras". But when either hand has limited itself, as here, it's just not necessary. Cue bidding by itself shows serious slam interest as otherwise you just bid game. There is little value in being able to distinguish "serious slam interest" from "super-serious slam interest", and a lot of value in being able to play 3nt, on this auction.

In other words, established 8 cd major fit should not be the only criteria for serious 3nt to kick in if agreed. Both hands should also still be relatively unlimited. This is mainly 2/1 auctions where 2nt has not been bid.

[pclayton]

You could play Mathe Asking Bid here. 3N would ask for shortness, and thats exactly what we need. Its hard to come up with a hand that has a decent play for slam without short hearts, but even a magic xxx, x, Axxx, AQxxx looks like it needs some luck for 12 tricks.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

depending on the rest of the system you play,
you may have a look at Alvin Roths "Picture Bidding". (*)

He discusses various follow ups to forcing NT.

Of course be prepared, that his suggested style is
not mainstream, but ....

With regards to your auction:
I play 3NT as serious in the given sequence.
Partner is expected to start a cue bidding sequence,
and he can move over 4S, if he holds magic cards for
his 3 card limit raise.
If you agree, that your first cue bid, shows the King or Ace
of the suit bid, you have solution for your problem.
This style helps to see, if the hands fit and it is aplayable style.

The downside: sometimes you need to by pass a suit with a
shortage, i.e. your partner may not know, that a given suit
is stopped.

With kind regards
Marlowe

(*) As far as I know, it is out of print, but I am not 100% sure,
and even if this would be the case, you may get a used copy.
I am not 100% sure, if I can recomment it, but at least you
can be assured, that you will find lots of ideas in it, if you will
be able to incorporate the ideas in your system, is another story.

[Badmonster]

Thanks everyone for the thoughts and insights.

I often find great out of print bridge books cheap at addall.com, I'll look there.



Edited to add: Hah! $5, including shipping and the shipping costs more than the book!

[syl]

Serious 3NT is used in GAMEFORCING situations, when the trump suit in a major is agreed and we are at the 3 level.
In your sequence 3NT should be a proposal of final contract, say 5332 hand cca 14-16 HCP, especially when you hate to open 1NT with 5 cards in a major suit.

[hawk_eye]

One of the most important thing in slam bidding is to find out whether side singleton is playable (opposite e.g. xxxx or Axxx) or not.
This hand is really far away from slam, but with say Axx in ♥ instaed Qxx You would like to make one step forward.
I prefer this agreement (it´s Polish style):
3NT are "serious" but shows exactly 5242 shape (or 5332) - reason is, that also responder may have shortness, which can make slam cold
4♣ and 4♥ promising shortness and maximum

[jtfanclub]

Badmonster, on Jan 7 2007, 11:02 AM, said:

I held this hand :

Scoring: IMP

---

The bidding went P 1♠ p 1NT p 2♦ p 3♠ p 3nt p 4♠

Huh, you guys in SA-land are strange. Well, probably not, but I don't understand it.

I play Precision with forcing NT, and after 1♥-1NT-2♦, a 2NT call asks for shortness, which could very well be the 3 card limit raise sort of hand, or any variety of other hands that care about such things. I don't see what 2NT would be used for on this auction in SA that wouldn't share a similar purpose.

My real point is, you have one hand that is virtually unknown and one hand that is very well spelled out. Why is the hand that's spelled out considering slam? Isn't it up to responder to decide if slam is possible, and if it is, isn't it his responsibility to invite it?

[SoTired]

This hand is just shy of trying for slam opposite a 3-card limit raise. It would take the almost perfect 3-card limit raise to make 6S, so settle for 4S.

You might want to discuss this with a regular partner.

Say you actually held: AKQxx Kxx KQxx x. A 4H bid over 3S would indicate short clubs allowing responder to evaluate based on that. Or if your hand was AQJxx Ax KQxxx x, you might bid 4D over 3S, showing a 2nd good 5-card suit, asking responder to evaluate based on that.