[joker_gib]

I don't think more than 1 second to pull it !

4♠ !

[Apollo81]

What I didn't tell you was that this was given to the email panel with the added condition, "partner failed to alert 3♣."

If I were given this problem (with or without the failure to alert) I would bid an automatic 4♠. I don't see any reason to pass 3NT, nor do I think 3NT is some sort of slam try without an agreement. Thus I wouldn't bid 4♣ either. I didn't think this was much of a problem.

However, read this response by another member of the panel (who is a good player):
------
All you can assume from the failure to alert is that partner might have been unsure, and that 3N could be protecting. All of the cautious bids (4♠, Pass, Q-bids) just help partner protect, by letting you get out at the game level. If you protect, you deserve to be ruled against. If you Q-bid, and pass 4♠, some committees might let you slide. If you bid 4♠, there should be a procedural penalty. 4♠ is what you should bid with Jxxx QJx QJx Qxx. 4♠ means "Yuck." If you Pass 3N, in a misguided attempt to be ethical, you get to keep your bad score.

Opener must have a doubleton, and you must have some weak suit... You could always say that you were worried openers doubleton was opposite your weak suit... Hence you could always argue for bidding. What then is the point of bothering with a natural 3N in the first place? This is called a "self serving" argument, and committees tend to frown on them. However, passing 3N with this hand is over compensating. Passing 3N is not a logical alternative. You are unlikely to be ruled against, since passing 3N was not suggested by the failure to alert, but if partner had alerted, can you honestly say you would pass? Not likely. [name removed]'s poll showed this, with only one masochistic passer.

I chose to interpret 3N as a slam try, since natural is just silly with a 5-4 fit, and since slam try is not one of the things suggested by the unauthorized information. Once you interpret it this way, you have a 7.5 loser hand (limit raise is 8 and opener is 7), anything less than slam is protecting partner. Remember, you showed less than a limit raise (9 losers) with 3C. Give partner AKxxxx xx Ax AQX, a 17 count, and you have 13 top tricks. Does partner have to be control rich to make a slam try opposite a constructive raise? I would think so. Bid keycard and if not off 2 keys, or 1 and trump queen, then bid slam.

Scores
4N = 100
4C = 80 (perhaps the best "bridge" bid, but protecting vs misunderstanding lowers the score in my book). Lets you avoid slam opposite AKQxxx Kx xx AQx.
4H = 70 (similar to 4C, just not a good bid. Does not leave room for partner to Q-bid, and implies lack of controls in the minors)
Pass = 50 (masochist, but you win if they make a bad lead)
6S = 50 (not good bridge, but points for attempt at ethics similar to masochistic pass of 3N).
4S = 0 (procedural penalty - You are too strong)
---

I'm interested in comments on the above.

[whereagles]

Apollo81, on Nov 8 2007, 02:32 PM, said:

I chose to interpret 3N as a slam try, since natural is just silly with a 5-4 fit

I disagree. Why can't I have a decent 5332 with AQ on the doubleton?

[han]

3NT as an undiscussed slam try is just silly.

[Codo]

Hannie, on Nov 9 2007, 02:18 AM, said:

3NT as an undiscussed slam try is just silly.

If the bidding is 1 ♠ 3 ♥ 3 NT a slam try makes sense.
But after a 3 Club bid this is plain stupid. You cannot have a Slam interesst with no controls in the red suit.
After 1 ♠ 3 ♦ I would interpret pds 3 NT as strong, SI, no heart control, but now? Never ever.

[joker_gib]

Hannie, on Nov 8 2007, 06:18 PM, said:

3NT as an undiscussed slam try is just silly.

I agree !

If you want to make a slam try then you have 3 bids between 3♣ and 3NT to show something (or maybe 3♦ to ask for shortness)....

[Gerben42]

Quote

3NT as an undiscussed slam try is just silly.

3NT as "to play" with a known 5 - 4 fit is silly also (opening 4-card majors in 3rd seat for tactical reasons is okay, 4th seat not so).

So we're left with bidding what we have, which is ♣. I bid 4♣.

[cherdano]

Gerben42, on Nov 9 2007, 09:26 AM, said:

Quote

3NT as an undiscussed slam try is just silly.

3NT as "to play" with a known 5 - 4 fit is silly also

Apparently I am silly, I have played 3N with a 5-4 major fit before. It's not that frequent, but occasionally it is right.
Now please show me the hand where an undiscussed 3N slam try is the best way to find a slam..

[han]

I saw Josh bid 3NT yesterday with a 7-card suit after partner had supported him! 3NT was cold (9 top tricks, and a protected heart king) while 4S needed the heart ace onside.

The heart ace was onside and the rest of the field was in 4S so Josh lost one IMP. But 3NT was clearly the superior game.

We don't know partner's hand but it is not hard to imagine a hand for partner where 3NT will look like the best spot to him. With our hand it looks (in my opinion) that 4S is better so I think a pull is correct. Maybe there are some auctions where 3NT cannot be the winning spot but without discussion I would always assume that 3NT is natural. I find it very surprising that there are experts (?) who think otherwise.

[MFA]

Bidding 3NT on (balanced) 6 or 7 card suits has much more going for it than some random 5332. You need some fast tricks, and with 5332 it tends to go too slow for declarer, if the defense finds the weakest spot.

Playing 3NT as natural certainly has merit. Personally I do that only if the opponents have bid something, so that there are stopper issues and ruffs to help the decision (and, perhaps, so that slam is more unlikely).

Else I play 3NT as a slamtry w/o splinters (shown on 4-lvl). Below 3M bids are game invitational hands - best description. When there is only one in-between bid possible, it's a catch all INV.

[han]

How do you know partner has a random 5332? I doubt he has a random hand. I think 3NT says he has a hand that suggests 3NT.