[pclayton]

fred, on Sep 11 2008, 08:48 AM, said:

pclayton, on Sep 11 2008, 04:23 PM, said:

When I raise to 4N, I think I'm either semi balanced; 5332 looks optimal, but some weird 5♠1♦(43)'s and some weak 6♠2♦(32) certainly qualify.

Agree - 5431 is VERY possible. That is one of the reasons why it is so important IMO to bid 4D. Imagine that partner's diamonds are something like:

KQxxxx
AQxxxx
AKxxxx
AKQxxx
KQxxxxx
AQxxxxx

Where some of the x's may or may not be the 10 and/or 9 in each case.

With some of these holdings the concept of slam facing a singleton diamond will terrify partner. Even if he is not terrified, with some of these holdings it won't even occur to him over 4NT to give you the option of playing in 6D.

Pard will usually be 6♦2♠(32) or 1363 for 3N. With the 2362, pard will frequently rebid 2N or Kokish if the diamonds are marginal.

5413 / 5314 are just two of the eight hand patterns available for 4N. In the other cases if pard decides to be more bullish, he can check back for doubleton support with 5N (PAS).

[fred]

pclayton, on Sep 11 2008, 05:22 PM, said:

5413 / 5314 are just two of the eight hand patterns available for 4N. In the other cases if pard decides to be more bullish, he can check back for doubleton support with 5N (PAS).

Sorry friend, but I think you are being rather bullish here

What 8 hand patterns are you referring to? I assume that the only 5332 pattern you would bid 4NT on is 5323. That's one. There are two 5422 patterns and two 6322 patterns that don't have primary diamond support. That's five in total, but hands of these patterns do include the ruffing value for diamonds that many people seem to think is so important. Wouldn't you bid 4D and not 4NT with at least some of these hands?

And why not 6313, 6412, or 6214? If these patterns might qualify for for 4NT then they should be added to my count since the same considerations apply here as with 5431s. Furthermore I could see bidding 4NT with some 5-5 hands or even hands with diamond voids.

So I think it is at least even money (to put it mildly) that, whatever hand 4NT is meant to describe, a singleton diamond will be part of it. But even if I have counted badly...

1) I still think 4D will often make it (much) easier for partner to evaluate his hand accurately and that this call has virtually no downside versus 4NT.

2) Sure you might be able to back into diamonds some of the time after inviting slam with 4NT, but often there won't be any after - partner will Pass 4NT when you are cold for slam.

Obviously having Jx of instead of x in diamonds will often be the key to slam. IM(strong)O, you should try to get this point across in the bidding.

Anyways, I think I have spent enough time on this one so I am going back to work. If some future post manages to convince me that 4NT is better than 4D, I will be happy to admit it.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[kenrexford]

I'm glad I didn't start with my first thought, namely that in theory it might even be a winning idea to have any bid over 3NT agree diamonds...

[fred]

kenrexford, on Sep 11 2008, 09:47 PM, said:

I'm glad I didn't start with my first thought, namely that in theory it might even be a winning idea to have any bid over 3NT agree diamonds...

Now you have disappointed me, Ken.

I was sure you were going to suggest using transfers

Fred Gitelman
Biridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[kenrexford]

fred, on Sep 11 2008, 04:55 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Sep 11 2008, 09:47 PM, said:

I'm glad I didn't start with my first thought, namely that in theory it might even be a winning idea to have any bid over 3NT agree diamonds...

Now you have disappointed me, Ken.

I was sure you were going to suggest using transfers

Fred Gitelman
Biridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Don't tempt me. LOL

[mike777]

". Using the pull of 3N to 4♦ to suggest a hand that may afford some advantage if played in diamonds rather than notrump, with 4N reserved for invitational hands that, in themselves, appear to afford no such advantage, allows for intelligent decision making. While I would have thought that this distinction was self-evident, let me pose a question. I assume that we'd all agree that partner's bidding is acceptable on x AJx AKQ109x AKx."


As a nonexpert I thought the example hand was a borderline 2c opener. I could understand opening 1D and planning to rebid 3nt over 1s. STrong one suited minor suits hands are tough to bid or rebid.

As I mentioned I understand and have no issue with 4nt but I thought 4d was an option and one I would have chosen. Granted I use/rely on rkc minor suit auctions much more often than MikeH