[gwnn]

1NT-2♦-4♥

Can a nice 5♥332 16.5-17 count bid 4♥? Is it winning bridge?

(let's assume no 6322 or any other funny things)

[pclayton]

I've seen this call made successfully, but the hand that wants to bid 4♥ is probably too strong for a 1N opening.

[jdonn]

I've seen this call made twice before. It failed miserably one time with 4♥ down 2 in a desperate effort to make when 3♥ was cold, and broke even the other time since responder always had a game bid over 3♥. It DNE with good players as far as I'm concerned.

The last time partner transfered to my five card major, I bid 2♥ and played it there happily. They don't know to balance if you don't tell them how big your fit is on these auctions, which is why I hate with a passion 'always' superaccepting in some way with four.

[mikeh]

DNE

How can one possibly hold a 1N opener that is too strong for a super-accept?

I guess if one plays that one must super-accept with any 4 card support, you might feel pressure to super-super accept with a maximum,, but I have never seen the advantage of the 'always super-accept' approach: in fact I believe it to be silly bridge. It 'works' only when you want to preempt the opps, while it destroys your game and slam bidding since responder has no clue whether you are a soft 15 3433 or a control rich 16-17 4432 (oh, I know that some players like to tell the opps where their doubleton is and so on, but the 'strength' part is still valid even for those). After I open 15-17 1N and both opps pass at their 1st (and sometimes 2nd) opportunity, preempting is not uppermost on my mind

[mike777]

mikeh, on Jan 5 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

DNE

How can one possibly hold a 1N opener that is too strong for a super-accept?

I guess if one plays that one must super-accept with any 4 card support, you might feel pressure to super-super accept with a maximum,, but I have never seen the advantage of the 'always super-accept' approach: in fact I believe it to be silly bridge. It 'works' only when you want to preempt the opps, while it destroys your game and slam bidding since responder has no clue whether you are a soft 15 3433 or a control rich 16-17 4432 (oh, I know that some players like to tell the opps where their doubleton is and so on, but the 'strength' part is still valid even for those). After I open 15-17 1N and both opps pass at their 1st (and sometimes 2nd) opportunity, preempting is not uppermost on my mind

For me with a minumum superaccept I bid 3 of the major.

I dont have a 4 level super accept.

[inquiry]

I searched the most recent bridgebrowser database for BBO tournaments/team games a total of 939 times. So yes,this auction occurs. The 4♥ bidders held from 13 to 21 hcps, and the average result was +0.46 imps (+/- 0.24) and 51.31% (+/- 1.60).

It is a shame that these bidders get away with such a break down in the concept of captaincy, but they get normal result when partner had enough to invite or force to game.

BTW, i voted that it does not exist, since after all, there is no logical meaning for it.

[matmat]

inquiry, on Jan 5 2008, 04:34 PM, said:

It is a shame that these bidders get away with such a break down in the concept of captaincy, but they get normal result when partner had enough to invite or force to game.

BTW, i voted that it does not exist, since after all, there is no logical meaning for it.

couple of points.

1) people (myself included) get away with way more bad bridge than what should be considered fair.

2) there is a perfectly logical explanation for the bid. it's a splinter in support of diamonds. duh.

[Cascade]

I've seen this auction at least once successfully perpetrated against me by a national champion.

We open 1NT sometimes with a singleton usually a high honour (ace, king or queen) but 4-4-4-1's with any black singleton are possible as are some 5-4-3-1's with weak long suits. I have been tempted occasionally to bid 4-Major over a transfer with a side suit singleton and a hand that has revalued more than a normal super-accpet but so far have resisted the temptation although i can imagine that not lasting forever.

We don't super-accept on every hand with four-card support in fact I think we are quite conservative - I've been minus 200 (or worse) in 3Major too often. Our requirements for a super-accept are:

1. An absolute maximum with four or more trumps

2. Most hands with five trumps - soft values and non-maximums won't super-accept

3. Most hands with a singleton - not with a minimum and a singleton king or queen.

[Fluffy]

Of course exists, my client does it 2 or 3 times each year, and it is succesfull only when I have GF values.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

The bid does not exists, and even, if it would
show the hand you skeched above, it would
not be necessary.
1) partner is broke, you are to high
2) partner would have accepted anyway
3) partner would have liked to have some
space to investigate 6H, and now all he
can do after 4H is bidding 4NT

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

Of course the bid exists:

A
AKxx
KT9x
QJxx

Has chances opposite pard's expected assorted junk, e.g.,

xxx
Qxxxx
xx
xxx

[FrancesHinden]

I've seen this auction exactly once, after partner carelessly opened his 16-count a 10-13 1NT (before the days of announcements, so no UI).

I've seen hands a couple of times where a 1NT overcaller raises partner's transfer to game, but that's a little different, as a 1NT overcall is more likely to be offshape.

[dburn]

I'm pretty sure I've seen it in international play, and that Eric Rodwell or Jeff Meckstroth was the perpetrator (but fourth hand had intervened over the transfer). Still, if they can do it, I guess it must exist. I'll look it up when I get home.

[dake50]

Does exist: partner discovered his D were more H.

[rogerclee]

I admit that I have perpetrated this myself. I don't really like it though. I think on most hands, partner will cooperate with a super-accept if you guys can really make 4H.

[cherdano]

gwnn, on Jan 5 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

1NT-2♦-4♥

Can a nice 5♥332 16.5-17 count bid 4♥? Is it winning bridge?

(let's assume no 6322 or any other funny things)

Certainly never with a 5332.

[jeffford76]

dake50, on Jan 6 2008, 01:35 PM, said:

Does exist: partner discovered his D were more H.

Exactly. Opponents were not amused when I ruffed the opening lead the one time I had the auction 1NT - 2D - 4H - 4NT - 6H.

OK, I admit also once having the auction 1NT (12-14) - 2H (signoff) - 4H when I figured the (mostly strong NT) field auction was 1H - 4H. Turned out to make 5H, and the field wasn't in the game, although I understand this doesn't mean it was "right".

[Cascade]

jeffford76, on Jan 8 2008, 08:19 AM, said:

dake50, on Jan 6 2008, 01:35 PM, said:

Does exist: partner discovered his D were more H.

Exactly. Opponents were not amused when I ruffed the opening lead the one time I had the auction 1NT - 2D - 4H - 4NT - 6H.

My partner a youth (junior) at the time but since then an international player once had the auction (yes it was as if I was not there):

1NT* (Pass) Pass (2♥)
4♠ all Pass

* 12-14

sometime between opening 1NT and rebidding 4♠ he discovered he had two four-card spade suits in his 4-4-3-2 hand.

[dburn]

Life Imitating Art Department: yesterday at TGR's I had this auction with The Great Malinowski:

Scoring: Chicago

---

East (TGM) 1NT (15-17). West (yours truly) 2♠ (to play). East 4♠ (also to play). Of course, I would have bid game anyway over 3♠, but Artur is not a believer in sending a boy to do a man's job.

North leads ♣10 to dummy's jack (beginners and intermediate players should consider why it is wrong to play the king) and South's ace. South returns ♣5 on which North follows with the two. Plan the play, and don't go down when you could have made it or you will never hear the last of it.