[cyc0002002]

---

N v V
the bidding goes:
1NT* X 2♠** 3♣
- 3NT ?

* 13-15
** 5+S suit ,runs from 1NT

I feel my partner would stuck into endless throw-in
so I decide to save him ,and the 3NT.

the result was good, -300 bought their 3NT
but my partner thought the 4♠ is unacceptable

I want u to rate the 4♠

[cRi cRi]

I agree with your partner .

[pooltuna]

cRi cRi, on Jul 27 2009, 10:31 AM, said:

I agree with your partner .

based on what criteria? Your side has to make 7 tricks assuming the other side has 9 tricks locked up to turn a profit. Do you think you are setting 3NT based on your ♠ suit?

[cRi cRi]

No, I base this on the fact that we have between 16 and 18 count and we have a good lead.

[pooltuna]

cRi cRi, on Jul 27 2009, 12:13 PM, said:

No, I base this on the fact that we have between 16 and 18 count and we have a good lead.

Having a good lead is not the same as setting 3NT. Sure you can set up your ♠ but which deuce are you using for an entry?

[NickRW]

cyc0002002, on Jul 27 2009, 03:11 PM, said:

I want u to rate the 4♠

Bit of a gamble perhaps, but it seems fine to me.

Anyway, right or wrong in principle, the result was OK - you sound like you have an ungrateful partner.

Nick

[WesleyC]

If you feel compelled to sacrifice over 3NT, you should have bid 3S on the first round to involve your partner in the decision.

Unilateral guesses like 2S then 4S are an insult to your partner's judgment.

[the hog]

WesleyC, on Jul 28 2009, 01:39 PM, said:

If you feel compelled to sacrifice over 3NT, you should have bid 3S on the first round to involve your partner in the decision.

Unilateral guesses like 2S then 4S are an insult to your partner's judgment.

Good post Wesley. I strongly agree with this sentiment. 3S first time sounds right to me.

[rhm]

cyc0002002, on Jul 27 2009, 10:11 AM, said:

---

N v V
the bidding goes:
1NT* X 2♠** 3♣
- 3NT ?

* 13-15
** 5+S suit ,runs from 1NT

I feel my partner would stuck into endless throw-in
so I decide to save him ,and the 3NT.

the result was good, -300 bought their 3NT
but my partner thought the 4♠ is unacceptable

I want u to rate the 4♠

4♠ was a good bid at match points. At IMPs it is much closer.
Once your partner opens 1NT you are the captain, not your partner, and I can not see any breach of partnership discipline nor why you need to consult him here.

It is possible but quite unlikely that you can beat 3NT.

3♠ immediately might or might not have been a better bid.
If you jump in such a situation you are telling opponents that you do have a long suit and do not mind getting doubled.
2♠ is in fact more likely to attract a penalty double, should opponents have no clear action.
The main attraction of 3♠ is that this makes it more difficult to find a ♥ fit.

Over 3♠ LHO opponent would probably double (action, showing values) and RHO is still likely to bid 3NT.

Now what?

Rainer Herrmann

[Jlall]

lol

[Cascade]

WesleyC, on Jul 28 2009, 06:39 PM, said:

If you feel compelled to sacrifice over 3NT, you should have bid 3S on the first round to involve your partner in the decision.

Unilateral guesses like 2S then 4S are an insult to your partner's judgment.

I am not sure that it is clear that 3♠ is asking partner to bid 4♠ with the right hand if necessary.

I suppose you could have that agreement but I doubt that it is standard.

[Fluffy]

I would had understood 3♠ as forcing with 5+ cards, maybe suboptimal, but I don't have specific agreements for this.

[OleBerg]

Quote

<snip>

3♠ immediately might or might not have been a better bid. 
If you jump in such a situation you are telling opponents that you do have a long suit and do not mind getting doubled.

<Snap>

Rainer Herrmann

Will you please tell my opponents that?

[peachy]

Your partner thought it unacceptable for what reason? Because he would not have bid it? Or because he does not want his partner to make gambling actions?
I don't see the merits of 4S, but having opened 1NT, your partner is not in charge of the auction after that. You gambled with 4S and won, if they would have made 3NT. Your 4S might have lost when they don't make 3NT or when 4S goes for more than their making game.

[Cascade]

Fluffy, on Jul 29 2009, 02:14 AM, said:

I would had understood 3♠ as forcing with 5+ cards, maybe suboptimal, but I don't have specific agreements for this.

I think it is fairly standard for a jump after a strong double of 1NT to be pre-emptive.

Strong hands can start with a double or jump to game.

[Fluffy]

On my only strong NT land nobody has played enough hands in his life where preempting had sense to ever think of standaricing it .

[Cascade]

This was a weak no trump - well 13-15

[cyc0002002]

peachy, on Jul 28 2009, 12:00 PM, said:

Your partner thought it unacceptable for what reason? Because he would not have bid it? Or because he does not want his partner to make gambling actions?

because my partner thought that It is a bad gambling ,in
IMP(sorry I forgot to mention it)