[precpj]

Bidding went unconstested

1NT 2D
2H 3NT

when hodling 3343 or 3334 do you choose 4M to play or stay at 3NT ?

why ?

the real hand I kibbed today was:

AQT XXX AKXX KXX

Precpj

[Jlall]

Bob Hamman told me a long time ago to always pass with 4333, and to be ready with that shape so that you aren't always thinking and giving away that you're 4333.

[jdonn]

4333 with xxx of the major I would definitely always pass. Personally I wouldn't pass with xxx of a side suit, too scary for me. With slightly better holdings I go with judgment but usually pass.

Edit: Now that I've contradicted myself, I don't know what I would do with xxx of the major and of a side suit. I think 4M is right.

[Jlall]

jdonn, on Oct 12 2009, 05:11 PM, said:

4333 with xxx of the major I would definitely always pass. Personally I wouldn't pass with xxx of a side suit, too scary for me. With slightly better holdings I go with judgment but usually pass.

Edit: Now that I've contradicted myself, I don't know what I would do with xxx of the major and of a side suit. I think 4M is right.

Yeah just want to reiterate that if you are gonna use judgement, you should have the rules in place for what you do on every hand type else you might be caught thinking and whatever you choose after thinking the opps will know you're very likely to be some 4333.

[awm]

It's important to mention that this sequence (transfer at two-level then 3NT) normally shows a very flat hand. I don't expect partner to bid this way with a singleton somewhere. Thus I would normally pass with a 4333 hand, although there is an occasional exception for hands with sharp cards and a weak three-card side suit.

Note that 2NT-transfer-3NT is a different sequence, because partner will often bid this way with shapely hands that have no slam aspirations. On this sequence I will virtually always correct to the major with 4333 hands (also has the advantage of creating entries to what could be a weak dummy).

[Jlall]

awm, on Oct 12 2009, 05:24 PM, said:

It's important to mention that this sequence (transfer at two-level then 3NT) normally shows a very flat hand. I don't expect partner to bid this way with a singleton somewhere. Thus I would normally pass with a 4333 hand, although there is an occasional exception for hands with sharp cards and a weak three-card side suit.

Note that 2NT-transfer-3NT is a different sequence, because partner will often bid this way with shapely hands that have no slam aspirations. On this sequence I will virtually always correct to the major with 4333 hands (also has the advantage of creating entries to what could be a weak dummy).

Yes people often mistakenly pass 2N transfer 3N with 4333, very good point.

[Phil]

Jlall, on Oct 12 2009, 05:26 PM, said:

awm, on Oct 12 2009, 05:24 PM, said:

It's important to mention that this sequence (transfer at two-level then 3NT) normally shows a very flat hand. I don't expect partner to bid this way with a singleton somewhere. Thus I would normally pass with a 4333 hand, although there is an occasional exception for hands with sharp cards and a weak three-card side suit.

Note that 2NT-transfer-3NT is a different sequence, because partner will often bid this way with shapely hands that have no slam aspirations. On this sequence I will virtually always correct to the major with 4333 hands (also has the advantage of creating entries to what could be a weak dummy).

Yes people often mistakenly pass 2N transfer 3N with 4333, very good point.

Agree. This was a real life lesson for me.

Big difference passing 3N with a 15-17 than a 20-21.

[gnasher]

awm, on Oct 12 2009, 11:24 PM, said:

It's important to mention that this sequence (transfer at two-level then 3NT) normally shows a very flat hand.

Does it? Or, at least, should it?

There are many 5422 and 5431 hands where responder isn't interested in any game except 3NT or a 5-3 fit in the major, but he does want to play in the major even opposite 4333. If your style is for opener to pass 3NT on most 4333 shapes, with these hands responder is obliged to show his second suit unnecessarily, purely to make sure of finding the 5-3 fit. This leads to unnecessary leakage of information, complicates the hands where responder really is interested in playing in his second suit or in a 5-2 major-suit fit, and adds murk to your two-suited slam sequences.

The best answer is to have two ways to show a 5-card major and a raise to 3NT - one where opener's allowed to pass with 4333 and one where he isn't.

Without that agreement, I think there's a good case for a style where opener usually converts to 4M even with a 4333. That loses when you have 5332 opposite 4333, but gains on the other hands I mentioned above.

Although 5332 shapes are more common, the expected gain from playing 3NT rather than 4M isn't that great - sometimes 4M turns out to be better anyway, and often both contracts are OK. Two-suiters are rarer, but because there are more possible contracts the expected gain from having a good auction is higher.

[awm]

gnasher, on Oct 13 2009, 02:53 AM, said:

There are many 5422 and 5431 hands where responder isn't interested in any game except 3NT or a 5-3 fit in the major

I'm trying to construct a 5431 hand where 3NT is the best game despite opener having three small opposite the singleton. Honestly I'm not having much luck. It basically has to be singleton ace or maybe king to prevent the opponents from running five tricks. But even then, we have one stopper and no ability to hold up, so there need to be nine top tricks. There also needs to be an eight-card fit somewhere (opponents have nine-card fit after all), and with the singleton in the short hand this fit seems to often produce two extra tricks. So on the hands where 3NT makes, often some other game also makes. But the alternate game frequently has additional chances...

Seems to me I'd be happy if my notrump methods never allowed me to play 3NT when responder is 5431 and opener has Jxx or worse opposite the singleton. I don't think I'm losing much here.

Certainly there are 5422 hands where Gnasher's point is true, but typically these hands have strong doubletons and fairly weak long suits. That's part of my definition of "very flat" -- notice that I purposely didn't say "5332." However, it's not unlikely that such a hand will play better in 3NT opposite a 4333 a lot of the time in any case. Ruffs in the long-major hand on a 5-3 fit aren't really that valuable except to prevent the opponents running a side suit, and if the doubletons are strong there is not really a concern about unstopped suits in notrump.

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Oct 12 2009, 05:07 PM, said:

Bob Hamman told me a long time ago to always pass with 4333, and to be ready with that shape so that you aren't always thinking and giving away that you're 4333.

Hamman's rule? Well I think it is clear to not even use Stayman with 4432 hands that have a major and can tell the partnership assets will be in the 27-29 range. I suspect for partnership assets in the same 27-29 range with 5332 use of Stayman rather than transfers will get the relevant hands that should play 4 of a major. I would think it is the marginal games, 25-26, that should play in the 8 card fit if appropriate rather than 3NT. With 4333 the NT bidder can probably pass with any max NT holding in transfer sequences and be okay. As a caveat this is all just suppositions that probably need the weight of a simulation to support the conjectures regardless of who is making them.

[gnasher]

awm, on Oct 13 2009, 01:27 PM, said:

I'm trying to construct a 5431 hand where 3NT is the best game despite opener having three small opposite the singleton. Honestly I'm not having much luck. It basically has to be singleton ace or maybe king to prevent the opponents from running five tricks. But even then, we have one stopper and no ability to hold up, so there need to be nine top tricks. There also needs to be an eight-card fit somewhere (opponents have nine-card fit after all), and with the singleton in the short hand this fit seems to often produce two extra tricks. So on the hands where 3NT makes, often some other game also makes. But the alternate game frequently has additional chances...

Seems to me I'd be happy if my notrump methods never allowed me to play 3NT when responder is 5431 and opener has Jxx or worse opposite the singleton. I don't think I'm losing much here.

With Jxxxx AJx Kxxx Q opposite 15-17, how would you, in your preferred methods, avoid 3NT on the hands where partner has a doubleton spade and ♣xxx? And where would you like to play?

With that hand, I would take the view that it's so unlikely that we can make 4♠ on a 5-2 fit, or 5♦, that I wouldn't bother investigating. That leaves me rather better placed on hands where alternative contracts actually seem likely to make, such as AJ10xx xxx AQxx x. However, I can only do that if I have a reliable way to get to the 5-3 spade fit if one exists.

Quote

Certainly there are 5422 hands where Gnasher's point is true, but typically these hands have strong doubletons and fairly weak long suits. That's part of my definition of "very flat" -- notice that I purposely didn't say "5332." However, it's not unlikely that such a hand will play better in 3NT opposite a 4333 a lot of the time in any case. Ruffs in the long-major hand on a 5-3 fit aren't really that valuable except to prevent the opponents running a side suit

Or, putting it another way, one of the principal benefits of playing in a trump contract is that you can use your trumps to retain control.

Quote

, and if the doubletons are strong there is not really a concern about unstopped suits in notrump.

That seems a bit of an exaggeration, unless your 4333 notrump openers always have an honour in every suit. Even then, Kx opposite Qxx isn't a particularly robust holding.

[Jlall]

I play gnasher's suggested method of having 2 ways to bid 3N, one demanding a preference with 3 trumps and one allowing opener to use judgement with 3 trumps. Maybe this is largely influenced by my style of trying to get to the right game accuracte vs not giving up info, but I rarely use the bid that makes partner bid game with 3 trumps always because I almost always prefer transferring and bidding my minor.

The hands I do use it on are the ones gnasher speaks of, 5431 with stiff honor and many 5422s. I just think these don't come up that often.

[1eyedjack]

Tobjorn Lindeloef ran some computer simulations on this topic when drafting his book on the Cobra bidding system back in the early '80s or thereabouts (book overpriced, system overrated in my view, but well out of print now so you will not be troubled by it). It did contain some (for the time) fairly revolutionary ideas on hand evaluation. Anyway, as I recall his empirical results heavily suggested playing in 3NT on these hands. I do not know how sophisticated was the simulation, and I am sure that a more reliable method would be available now.

[awm]

It's pretty easy to construct a hand like Ax KQx AQxxx xxx where 5♦ is almost cold opposite Gnasher's example hand. Something like Ax Kxxx AQJx Jxx seems to offer a decent chance at 4♥ or 5♦, and 3NT isn't really very good.

As to how I bid these hands, in my methods responder (on a GF hand) pretty much shows exact shape and then opener decides what to do. It is true that Gnasher's two examples (the one with points in suits and the one with stiff club queen and weak spades) would start with the same auction

1NT - 2♥(1)
2♠ - 3♣(2)
3♦(3) - 3♠(4)

(1) Transfer
(2) Game force with 5+♠/4♦
(3) Relay, indicates some uncertainty about strain
(4) 5-3-4-1

Some of the continuations may be a bit different with the two hands; for example if opener tries 4♦ (indicating a hand unsuitable for 3NT and a diamond fit), then responder will offer 4♠ with a strong spade suit and raise to 5♦ with lousy spades. But the choice of whether to play 3NT is the same. So it could be that there are a lot of opener hands where Gnasher's pure example with points in suits plays better in a suit contract and the example with weak spades plays best in 3NT (or vice versa). But my feeling is that for the vast majority of opener hands, if 3NT is best opposite one responder hand it won't be a substantial underdog opposite the other. Feel free to prove me wrong.

[MickyB]

Jlall, on Oct 13 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

I play gnasher's suggested method of having 2 ways to bid 3N, one demanding a preference with 3 trumps and one allowing opener to use judgement with 3 trumps.

What routes are you each taking with the two handtypes?

[cherdanno]

I also usually have two methods of giving choice-of-game between 4M in a 5-3 fit and 3N, and I would use it on gnasher's hand.
Adam's is of course right that it is easy to construct hands where 5♦ is the right contract, but that's also completely besides the point. The point is that they are not frequent, and on the other hand partner will sometimes be wrong to bypass 3N when he doesn't know we have a stopper help with a singleton honor.

[Jlall]

MickyB, on Oct 13 2009, 12:57 PM, said:

Jlall, on Oct 13 2009, 03:16 PM, said:

I play gnasher's suggested method of having 2 ways to bid 3N, one demanding a preference with 3 trumps and one allowing opener to use judgement with 3 trumps.

What routes are you each taking with the two handtypes?

1N 2D 2H 2S=

invite with hearts or wants to play 3N opp 2 and 4H opp 3 or 5-5 majors. Over that:

2N=min with 2 hearts
3C=max with 2 hearts
3D=max with 3 hearts
3H=min with 3 hearts

So if you had a choice of games you can bid 3N or 4M appropriately. You leak the information about whether partner is minimum or maximum.

[gnasher]

MickyB, on Oct 13 2009, 06:57 PM, said:

What routes are you each taking with the two handtypes?

I play a method, originally based on Heeman, which includes transfers to the majors at both the two level and the three level. The two-level transfer includes two-suiters, invitations, and one of the 3NT bids. The three-level transfer includes one-suited invitations, one-suited slam tries without shortage, 5332 slam tries, and the other 3NT bid. I also leak information about opener's range.

Playing normal transfers, Justin's 2D-2H-2S idea works well. You can play that responder follows the same route on game-going major-minor two-suiters; if opener shows 3-card support responder bids game (thus getting a bit back on the information-leakage front); otherwise the next three steps show the second suit. That frees up a transfer followed by a new suit to show a slam try.

With spades, you can use 2H-2S;2NT as a length (but not range) ask, but you'll need a way to show an invitation with five spades. The obvious way to do that is 1NT-2C; 2x-2S, but that doesn't fit well with four-suit transfers.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2009-October-13, 14:53

[neilkaz]

4333 and weak trumps and basically no concerns about being set off the top by the lead means that I definately leave it in 3NT.