[jillybean]

Hi,

Scoring: IMP

(2♦)* P (4♥) ?

---

*6+ M weak or 4441 16+

No agreements, playing with a casual but competent partner.
Can I (should I) safely bid 4nt here, will most players understand this as
pick a minor game?

thanks
jb

[inquiry]

jillybean2, on Feb 8 2007, 01:43 PM, said:

Hi,

Scoring: IMP

(2♦)* P (4♥) ?

---

*6+ M weak or 4441 16+

No agreements, playing with a casual but competent partner.
Can I (should I) safely bid 4nt here, will most players understand this as
pick a minor game?

thanks
jb

If you bid 4NT here, your partner surely should understand this as two places to play and clearly for the minors specifically given you bypassed 4♠. Rather you SHOULD bid 4NT at this vulnerabilty and with those cards, is however, a HUGE question.

[kenrexford]

I'd ask about this strange 4♥ call. I cannot imagine that it is a pass-or-correct bid. It seems more like a one-suiter. If so, it seems that there is a fair risk that LHO is 4144, strong. If he is 4144 strong, partner may understand the meaning of 4NT without appreciating the logic.

[Walddk]

I don't know about *most* players, but I can assure you that expert players would interpret 4NT as take-out for the minors. However, I wouldn't bid 4NT with this hand. I have way too much in the majors and too little in the minors.

Roland

[hotShot]

I would understand that you want me to pick a minor, but i don't understand why you want to bid at all.
It is far from certain that they make 4♥ and it's very likely, that you are going down more than 3 in red.

[FrancesHinden]

kenrexford, on Feb 8 2007, 06:53 PM, said:

I'd ask about this strange 4♥ call. I cannot imagine that it is a pass-or-correct bid. It seems more like a one-suiter. If so, it seems that there is a fair risk that LHO is 4144, strong. If he is 4144 strong, partner may understand the meaning of 4NT without appreciating the logic.

Why can't you imagine it is pass-or-correct? Holding, say, Jxxx Qxxxx xx xx what would you like to bid (if you don't fancy a random psyche)?

Of the people playing a multi, whose systems I know in detail, they are about 50/50 split on whether 4H is natural or poc. (Those for whom it is pass-or-correct have an alternative way of getting to hearts; those for whom it is natural have an alternative 4-level way of asking for partner's major).

I've seen confusion on BBO vu-graph about the meaning of the 4H bid, however, so random opponents may be equally confused.

Anyway, I agree with
"If you bid 4NT here, your partner surely should understand this as two places to play and clearly for the minors specifically given you bypassed 4♠. Whether you SHOULD bid 4NT at this vulnerabilty and with those cards, is however, a HUGE question. "

[jillybean]

Well, I wanted to bid after the hand because we lost 9.3 imps, perhaps my partner should have acted.

Scoring: IMP

---

(2♦*) P (4♥) AP

[Walddk]

jillybean2, on Feb 8 2007, 09:18 PM, said:

Well, I wanted to bid after the hand because we lost 9.3 imps, perhaps my partner should have acted.

Yes, your partner should have acted in second seat with a double: 12-14 balanced or any 17+ (will bid again). Now it's much easier for you to double 4♥, alternatively bid 4NT for the minors.

My guess is that your partner was not familiar with the standard defence to the Multi 2♦. Forget about the 16+ 4441 hand and just treat it as a pre-empt in one of the majors.

Roland

[han]

I think that 4H is alertable.


Roland, as you know there are many ways to defend against multi, the way you suggest is just one of them. I don't know what they were playing, if they were indeed playing this defense then I agree, double is clear.

Jillybean, if you often encounter multi then you should discuss your defense with your regular partner.

[jillybean]

I do encounter multi often playing online, never at the club. I play with many people online hence any partnership agreements are quite basic, we play some sort of 'standard', if I'm lucky we have agreed which flavor of RKC we are using.

[helene_t]

I would double, hoping to be able to supress a laugh when it turns out that 4♥ was meant as hearts but interpretted as POC. I've made that mistake a couple of times myself and seen it by others an uncountable number of times.

Even playing against opps with good agreements, I think double is better than 4NT.

But indeed, 4NT can only show the minors.

[P_Marlowe]

4NT is for the minors.

With kind regards
Marlowe