[pclayton]

Addressing the LOTT issue:

Usually, RHO has 6 and LHO has three for the raise. One of them could be joking around, but I've found this to be true 75% of the time.

Pard's most likely shapes are: 0-4-5-4 and 0-4-4-5. Other possibilities are 0-5-4-4, and some sort of 5-5 or 6-4's. Lets set the clubs at 4, but I think thats a best case situation for the passers. 18 TT and no adjustments as far as I can see. The 10♠ is a possibility, but surely that card is exposed once I pass the double. So unless declarer has specifically the ♠AKJ, the ♠10 is immaterial. So, the spade 10 should be worth about a 1/3 trick, but certainly the chances of greater than a 9 card club fit more than offset this.

The knowledge of a 9 card club fit is good news for 3N, as it is not only a source of tricks, but also translates into entries to the closed hand for red suit finesses that will likely work. As far as the power required to make 3N - pard could have a good 15, but could also have 19 - 20. LHO should raise somewhat randomly with 3 trumps holding a yarb, but also holding a good 10-11 too, so we are at a guess to an extent. Additionally, RHO is somewhat undefined.

I too, have never heard of translating LOTT into NT contracts. Helene - can you elaborate on this?

If we are making 4♣, 3♠ is -1 (good for the 4♣ bidders, bad for the passers and the 5♣ bidders, and probably bad for the 3N bidders). If we are making 5♣, 3♠ is -2. Again, bad for the passers, possibly bad for the 4♣ bidders (if pard doesn't raise) but probably good for the 3N bidders.

If 5♣ is making 6, this is the only scenario where the pass seems to pay off with +500 against the +420's. Although I would argue in this case, 3N is getting +630, beating the club bidders.

SO its close. If you think your opponents are jerking you around (or are younger than 25 ), go ahead and pass. If they look like they have their calls, try 3N or 4♣.

[mike777]

"I too, have never heard of translating LOTT into NT contracts. Helene - can you elaborate on this? "

LOTT is very commonly used in NT contracts.

to quote Larry Cohen:
"The number of Total Tricks, when side A plays in notrump and side B plays in a trump suit = seven plus the number of trumps held by side B."

Of course as Larry always says "Do not forget adjustments".

[pclayton]

mike777, on Aug 18 2005, 12:18 PM, said:

"I too, have never heard of translating LOTT into NT contracts. Helene - can you elaborate on this? "

LOTT is very commonly used in NT contracts.

to quote Larry Cohen:
"The number of Total Tricks, when side A plays in notrump and side B plays in a trump suit = seven plus the number of trumps held by side B."

Of course as Larry always says "Do not forget adjustments".

Curious.

So 16 TT (NT vs ♠'s).

If 3N is -1, then 3♠ -1.
If 3N fetches, then 3♠ - 2.
If 3N gets 4, then 3♠ -3.

2:1 for the pass.

Cohen's assertion makes it right to pass with a 4 card trump stack vs playing 3NT when the opponents have a 9 card fit, unless you are red / white.

Does anyone really agree with this?

[mike777]

pclayton, on Aug 18 2005, 04:33 PM, said:

mike777, on Aug 18 2005, 12:18 PM, said:

"I too, have never heard of translating LOTT into NT contracts. Helene - can you elaborate on this? "

LOTT is very commonly used in NT contracts.

to quote Larry Cohen:
"The number of Total Tricks, when side A plays in notrump and side B plays in a trump suit = seven plus the number of trumps held by side B."

Of course as Larry always says "Do not forget adjustments".

Curious.

So 16 TT (NT vs ♠'s).

If 3N is -1, then 3♠ -1.
If 3N fetches, then 3♠ - 2.
If 3N gets 4, then 3♠ -3.

2:1 for the pass.

Cohen's assertion makes it right to pass with a 4 card trump stack vs playing 3NT when the opponents have a 9 card fit, unless you are red / white.

Does anyone really agree with this?

Larry assumes pard is 1444, if partner is void then you need to consider adjustments, complicated.

A void suggests a positive adjustment and more total tricks than 16. With positive adjustments you tend to bid on. Of course is partner void?

[coyot]

pclayton, on Aug 18 2005, 02:57 PM, said:

Addressing the LOTT issue:

The knowledge of a 9 card club fit is good news for 3N, as it is not only a source of tricks, but also translates into entries to the closed hand for red suit finesses that will likely work. As far as the power required to make 3N - pard could have a good 15, but could also have 19 - 20. LHO should raise somewhat randomly with 3 trumps holding a yarb, but also holding a good 10-11 too, so we are at a guess to an extent. Additionally, RHO is somewhat undefined.

If you want to address the LOTT issue correctly, you will surely remember that it works under the condition that both sides have similar strength!

If partner has something between 13-16 HCP, LOTT works without adjustment.
If he has 17-18, I there will half-trick adjustment to our side
If he has 19-20, we're likely to score one or more extra trick in every contract.

There are other problems: If we happen to have 9card fit without the ace, 3NT may be a no-go because we will score 2 tricks in clubs ) (against Axx on either side).

Also, 2♠ opening may be 5card when it comes to that , not very often, but not to be ignored...

Even if things are as expected... if partner has 13-16, I'm bidding 3NT on 19-22HCP, hoping that we have 5 club tricks and (if the defense is any good) 4 tricks in red suits
(See above my explanation why the Q10xx in spades might be useless).

Summary: I would close my eyes and bid 3NT red vs. white, maybe... In all other cases I happily pass and hope to collect a nice plus. Why hang partner just because he doubled 2♠ with 544 or 553 shape and 13-16 HCP?.

The argument about having club entries to play red finesses is pretty useless since both red suits will likely break badly, with the longer hand behind partner...

Usefullness of spade 10 is about the same in 3NT and in 3♠ doubled. If the long hand contains AJ9xxx and the shorter Kxx, I will never score 2 spade tricks - and if RHO has a side entry, I might score none

3NT is a gamble - and IMHO losing bridge in long-term...