[Ant590]

Hi all,

A complete disaster on the following board last night... I shan't own up to which seat I was in...

4 card majors, weak (12-14) NT...

Scoring: IMP

1♣ – 1♦
1NT* – 3NT

* 15-17

---

Constructive criticism please!

[matmat]

heh
opposite a natural (i assume it's natural since it ain't alerted) 1D response, the south hand is much beter than a 17 count. you have a six card side suit that can either get set up or ruffed out opposite p's holding, 4 card support for p's assumed 5 bagger and first and first/second round controls in the majors.

I hat splintering with singleton aces, (that and i don't think this hand is quite worth a 3♠ bid), but i'd certainly try 3♦. p could still be responding on a bad 4/5 count, so they may need an out. if p doesn't make a move toward slam over 3♦ i look for a new p.

[gwnn]

matmat, on Jan 24 2008, 01:07 PM, said:

heh
opposite a natural (i assume it's natural since it ain't alerted) 1D response, the south hand is much beter than a 17 count. you have a six card side suit that can either get set up or ruffed out opposite p's holding, 4 card support for p's assumed 5 bagger and first and first/second round controls in the majors.

I hat splintering with singleton aces, (that and i don't think this hand is quite worth a 3♠ bid), but i'd certainly try 3♦. p could still be responding on a bad 4/5 count, so they may need an out. if p doesn't make a move toward slam over 3♦ i look for a new p.

I agree with all of this, but I have to add that N is not without blame. Just bidding 3NT is lazy and being a walrus. Surely this is not an average 15 count which says "maximum 32 hcp, ...". So missing grand was a cooperative effort, with South getting somewhat more than North - lying about shape and withholding support is worse than being a walrus.

[paulg]

*15-17

South should understand that it is better to play a 1NT rebid as showing 15-17 points with a balanced hand.

That said, the hand is awkward. If North responds with suits up the line, then there is a serious chance that 1♦ is the lowest of three 4-card suits which means that the fake reverse into 2♥ is unattractive (as you will never get to play in diamonds). So a 3♠ splinter is about the only choice left aside from a RKCB 4NT (which is not ridiculous). I do think the hand should be forcing to game, so I would not bid 3♦.

From North's perspective, it would be important to know whether the 1NT rebid, or the opening 1♣, denies a 4-card major in a balanced hand. If South can still have spades then there is value in bidding 2♠ now as you'd like to find a fit before trying for a slam that may be low on points. If South cannot have 4 spades then I have sympathy with the 3NT bid.

Paul

[P_Marlowe]

#1 Openers 1 NT rebid is ..., I dont spell it out,
because you requested constructive critisim
I would just ask you, what did stop you
from bidding 3D? .... ?

#2 the opening, the response and the 3NT bid
are clear cut

#3 If opener rebids 3D, which should show at least
a 5-4 distribution, because shows an unbal. hand,
with 4441 opener has a rebid in a mayor, responder
will make a move toward slam, ... and you will end
in 6 or 7.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gwnn]

P_Marlowe, on Jan 24 2008, 02:49 PM, said:

#1 Openers 1 NT rebid is ..., I dont spell it out,
because you requested constructive critisim
I would just ask you, what did stop you
from bidding 3D? .... ?

#2 the opening, the response and the 3NT bid
are clear cut

#3 If opener rebids 3D, which should show at least
a 5-4 distribution, because shows an unbal. hand,
with 4441 opener has a rebid in a mayor, responder
will make a move toward slam, ... and you will end
in 6 or 7.

With kind regards
Marlowe

they open 1M on 4441's I think

[ArtK78]

100% of the blame to South (opener).

One must remember that when playing a weak NT, the 1NT rebid is supposed to be approximately the same as a 1NT opener. I don't think anyone would dream of opening the South hand 1NT (15-17).

That doesn't even get into the fact that South's hand is much better than a 1NT opening in support of diamonds.

North's bidding is perfectly normal. You can call it lazy if you want, but I would make the same calls.

[Codo]

1. There is no way to have a constructive critism for such a destructive bid as 1 NT.

You have a fit, an unbalanced hand and much more playing strength then 15-17 balanced will announce.
To make 6 Diamonds in the absence of a heart lead you just need xxx,xxxx,KTxx,Ax.
I had tried a direct 4 Diamond bid which happens to be RCKB for Diamonds where I life. PD answers 0/3 KCS and I settle for 4 NT because I would believe that he has no KCs at all. Pd will bid 6 Diamond cause he has three KCs and I will happily bid 7 Diamond, knowing that he can claim quick.

If 4 Diamond is not avaiable, I would try 3 Spade as a splinter.
But this has some other problems. An Ace is no good card to splinter and I have no way to show the nature of my hand to partner, so I better try to be the captain of the bidding.

North has 15 HCPS and a 5 card suit opposite 15-17 HCPS, he make just normal bids. He could/should have tried 2 Spade instead of 3 NT to show the 5/4 hand and hope for a slam depending on some controls in south hand, but 3 NT was fine too.

[hotShot]

100% of the blame goes to south.

1♣ with a 1NT rebid shows a hand without a 4 card major and I would never expect a 6421 distribution with a 4 card support in my suit after that bid.
Opposite a 3334 distribution even with 17 HCP 6NT seems unlikely.

3/4♦ would have been good choices and a 4/5/6♦ bid over 3NT would have been a solution for the situation.

[han]

Agree with the panel, south should raise diamonds.

[mikeh]

While I agree that South bid extremely badly, I still think North bid poorly, even tho his bad bidding is probably irrelevant to the actual result. I'm not sure that the hand is quite strong enough to make a quantitative slam try in notrump... but I suspect that the methods in use retained the prospect that South might hold a hand such as AK10x xx QJx KQJx, in which case 3N is a silly contract. Now, if North had reversed into 2♠, maybe our so-far silly South might wake up... although how he can catch up, I don't know.

Thus, North did not bid well, but his error almost certainly cost nothing. Even if you think that you personally would have bid 4N, surely no-one sees that as a clear error.. at worst it is a reasonable, but a trifle conservative, decision. Do we want to table that hand in slam opposite AKx Axxx xx KQJx, as an example? (Yes, I know that many, many hands on which he'd accept yield an excellent play for slam, but the point is that many don't)

Incidentally, the question of whether 3♦ is adequate for South raises interesting issues.

My own style (which I think is fairly common but by no means universal) is that the sequence 1♣  1♦  2♦ shows an unbalanced hand... and that, of course, fits with the methods in use here, since balanced minimums open 1N. This means that 3♦ is both unbalanced and significant extras. I don't think it means that it is forcing, but it is highly encouraging. Which happens to fit my view of S's hand, albeit he is near maximum, if not absolutely maximum for the call. One's methods should always allow one to hold maximums

Opposite Qxx xxx K10xxx Jx, I think 3♦ is enough

[cherdano]

Mike, playing 4-card majors and weak NT, wouldn't you expect a 1♠ opening from the hand you quote?
Anyway, 1NT is a very very bad bid, it misdescribes the hand, and is a huge underbid at the same time.

[mikeh]

cherdano, on Jan 24 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

Mike, playing 4-card majors and weak NT, wouldn't you expect a 1♠ opening from the hand you quote?
Anyway, 1NT is a very very bad bid, it misdescribes the hand, and is a huge underbid at the same time.

no, with a balanced 15-17 and 4=4 in the blacks, I open 1♣ so that my 1N rebid describes the hand: consider the problems with 16, say, over a 1N response to 1♠, and that is the most common response even when it is non-forcing