[Fluffy]

♠QJ5
♥A52
♦A73
♣A932

Match Points Your side vulnerable, it goes 3♥-(pass)-???

[mtvesuvius]

Well, my first thought was 4♥, but I think I like 3NT much more. All partner needs is the K♥. Even if partner doesn't have the K♥, 3NT still is better.

[rogerclee]

obvious 3N

[JLOL]

cleeno

[MarkDean]

<retracted silly statement>

[Phil]

Only because we are vulnerable / not will I bid 3N. I expect it to be cold and when hearts makes 10 tricks, I expect to 10 in NT.

[whereagles]

At these colors I think you're allowed to hope for ♥KQ 7th in pard.

3NT

[mcphee]

Looks to me like the fastest 3N bid I ever had. I can see 9 tricks and 4H could even go down. This is not even close.

[jdonn]

mcphee, on Apr 17 2009, 07:04 AM, said:

Looks to me like the fastest 3N bid I ever had. I can see 9 tricks and 4H could even go down. This is not even close.

Yeah I think this one is very easy. I see 9 easy tricks and 4 very likely losers.

[orlam]

mcphee, on Apr 17 2009, 07:04 AM, said:

Looks to me like the fastest 3N bid I ever had. I can see 9 tricks and 4H could even go down. This is not even close.

If you have 9 tricks in NT and hearts "could" go down (but will probably make), isn't 4♥ the correct matchpoints bid?

[Free]

3NT is safe, 4♥ is not. I prefer safety

[JLOL]

MarkDean, on Apr 16 2009, 06:10 PM, said:

4♥ for me. Loses often when partner has a stiff spades, but gains on a lot of hands when he has 2-3 spades.

Why do you necessarily gain when partner has 2 spades?

[JLOL]

orlam, on Apr 17 2009, 12:24 PM, said:

mcphee, on Apr 17 2009, 07:04 AM, said:

Looks to me like the fastest 3N bid I ever had. I can see 9 tricks and 4H could even go down. This is not even close.

If you have 9 tricks in NT and hearts "could" go down (but will probably make), isn't 4♥ the correct matchpoints bid?

Stranger things have happened than them leading spades vs 3N and us taking 10 tricks.

[MarkDean]

JLOL, on Apr 17 2009, 10:01 AM, said:

MarkDean, on Apr 16 2009, 06:10 PM, said:

4♥ for me.  Loses often when partner has a stiff spades, but gains on a lot of hands when he has 2-3 spades.

Why do you necessarily gain when partner has 2 spades?

oops, I was being dumb, thinking we needed to let them in once less than we do.

[Stephen Tu]

I think "not even close", "obvious", "very easy" etc. are exaggerations. If partner has a stiff minor and the K of spades for example, 4H rates to do better. Or something like Qxxx in a minor to set up.

I ran some sims, 3nt wins but by only about 55-45 if you say partner must have HKQ + some stuff outside. If partner is crazy aggro (or other vulnerability conditions), then 4h can pull ahead.

[jdonn]

Stephen Tu, on Apr 17 2009, 03:49 PM, said:

I ran some sims, 3nt wins but by only about 55-45 if you say partner must have HKQ + some stuff outside.  If partner is crazy aggro (or other vulnerability conditions), then 4h can pull ahead.

The fact that 3NT wins at sims where they always make the right lead just shows how much better it will work in practice. If partner has a stiff minor and king of spades, and they lead a spade.... And I don't think that is offset by much declaring advantage, since there will rarely be much to declaring this hand.

It's true of course they could also make the wrong lead at 4♥, but I think that less likely matters, and is less likely to occur.

[Fluffy]

This time partner held

♠10xx
♥KQJ10xxx
♦xxx
♣-

They led a club on my 3NT and I could make only 9 tricks while 620 was avaible.

[Phil]

Fluffy, on Apr 20 2009, 07:33 AM, said:

This time partner held

♠10xx
♥KQJ10xxx
♦xxx
♣-

They led a club on my 3NT and I could make only 9 tricks while 620 was avaible.

Next time pard will have xx KQJxxxx xx xx.

Be happy your opponent's aren't finding the profitable 5♣ sac