[gwnn]

I remember some famous American expert talking about the sequence

1NT-2♦
2♥-3NT
4m

as 'one of the less known but really useful bids', i.e. opener shows a good max with 3 cards.

Do you think it's a good idea? How often would you do this? and could you give an example hand?

[aguahombre]

Since partner didn't ask if I was minimum or maximum, only whether to play in hearts or notrump --I don't see any reason to give the opps any additional information.

[fred]

It is a useful sequence, especially if you never super-accept unless you have 4-card support for partner's major.

To bid 4 of a minor here suggests a source of tricks in the suit you bid. For example, you might have:

Axx
KQx
xx
AK10xx

This sort of hand could easily produce 12 tricks opposite a hand for which it would not even occur to partner to make a slam try. For example:

xx
AJxxx
Axx
Qxx

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Siegmund]

I actually held such a hand at the club Friday. Partner opened a 15-17 notrump and I had AQx KQxxx Axx Tx; it felt like 2D then 3N wasn't enough, but the alternatives, rebidding a 4-card side suit I didnt have or leaping to 4N, didn't appeal either. If partner had a way to show a max with heart support and AKx clubs or KQx diamonds I would have felt a lot better about a 3N rebid. But neither p nor I had ever considered the idea before.

[fred]

Siegmund, on Apr 4 2010, 05:50 PM, said:

I actually held such a hand at the club Friday. Partner opened a 15-17 notrump and I had AQx KQxxx Axx Tx; it felt like 2D then 3N wasn't enough, but the alternatives, rebidding a 4-card side suit I didnt have or leaping to 4N, didn't appeal either. If partner had a way to show a max with heart support and AKx clubs or KQx diamonds I would have felt a lot better about a 3N rebid. But neither p nor I had ever considered the idea before.

Unfortunately my suggestion would be unlikely to help that much with your hand.

The key point is that 4m over 3NT suggests a source of tricks (ie a real suit - not just a nicely holding like KQx or AKx). It is relatively rare that opener is dealt an appropriate hand for making this call.

Your hand doesn't need a source of tricks in partner's hand in order for there to be a good slam - you just need the hands to fit well enough to produce 12 tricks. For example, partner will hardly be enamored with a spade holding like KJxx, but opposite your hand that would be pure gold. Assuming you play a relatively normal bidding system, there is no way that you are going to be able to even come close to always diagnosing things like this. You (and everyone else who plays "standard") should expect to get to the wrong contract fairly often when you hold this hand.

This hand is very close to being worth 4NT over 2H in my view. If you somehow knew in advance that partner had 3 hearts, then I think it would be worth 4NT (because facing 3-card support greatly increases the chances that you will be able to run the heart suit).

Perhaps that argues for doing something strange - start bidding the hand like you did, but make some move to try for slam if partner bids 4H over your 3NT.

I have to admit that I have never bid a hand that way before and there are probably plenty of very fine players who would laugh at the very concept (because it sounds inconsistent). That being said, it would not surprise me if this plan produced better results than any of the alternatives.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Jlall]

In my experience, it is much more common to have the auction 2N-3D-3H-3N-4m.

I don't think this is just because the 2N bidder is more likely to have a super hand, it's because after a 2N opener responder often has to transfer and bid 3N with some unbal hands that can produce a slam pretty easily.

After a 1N opener responders transfer and 3N is much more limited to a balanced or pretty semi-balanced hand (since they could bid 3m without bypassing 3N), and probably is limited to a bit less slam potential.

So for me to bid 2N-3D-3H-3N-4C I wouldn't need such a super exceptional hand, for me to bid 1N-2D-2H-3N-4C I would need something like freds example hand pretty much every time. Still it's a possible auction.

[Bbradley62]

gwnn, on Apr 4 2010, 12:45 PM, said:

Do you think it's a good idea? How often would you do this?

Why not, with the hand Fred gave? It doesn't mean anything else, so it's a plus even if you only use it a couple of times per year.

[nigel_k]

Fred's example works, but only because refusing to ever superaccept without four card support is just such a bad method. The purpose of a superaccept is to reach games that would otherwise be missed, not to ensure compliance with some law that doesn't work anyway.

A hand where slam is good and partner would not make a slam try will also be a hand where game is good and partner would not make a game try

e.g. Axx KQx xx AK10xx opposite xx Jxxxx Axx Qxx

There is an obvious difference that the slam try doesn't raise the level of bidding and a superaccept does, but I really doubt that two of a major making exactly will be par very often when opener has a maximum with good three card support and a good five card minor like the above example. You'll miss games by not superaccepting on that hand much more often than you go one down at the three level when you could have gone plus.