[OleBerg]

Scoring: IMP

---

With opponents silent throughout, you have shown 15-17 with 4 hearts. Partner has shown 5+spades, exactly invitational.

Unfortunately your homegrown "expert-system" has already brought you to 3♠, so now you have to choose betweem 3NT and 4♠.

I choose 4♠, reasoning that clubs could be quite open, and communication to spades could be a problem. The ♠J also suggest that the spade-suit is a good thrumph suit.

What do you think.

[Free]

Nah, partner's values may also be in ♣ and even ♥J in which case 3NT is a walk in the park, while 4♠ is a disaster. As far as I can tell from your explanation there are no guarantees that partner's ♠ suit must be a good suit.

[OleBerg]

Free, on Aug 20 2010, 10:27 AM, said:

...there are no guarantees that partner's ♠ suit must be a good suit.

Correct, we only know it is 5+. (And with 6 he'd normally take it to 4♠ himself.)

[jjbrr]

seems close. i suspect 3NT makes more often than 4♠ if partner is much more likely to have 5♠ only

[rogerclee]

I don't understand, we have good club spots, and this is a situation where we could easily be taking 9 tricks without touching spades ever, I mean look at how good our red suits are! Overall I think bidding 4S is ridiculous/horrible/masterminding.

[Phil]

Its real close TBH and 4♠ might work or even pass. 4♠ seems very dependent on the strength of partner's spade spots, and the weakness / length of a club stopper.

AKTxx xx xxx xxx. No game is really good, but 3N is better than 4♠.

KQxxx, xx, Qxx, Qxx. I think is the genre of hand Roger is referring to. A lot of 'what ifs' here - 3N looks better than 4♠.

KQTxx xx Qxxx Jx. This looks like the type of layout Ole is looking for, but note that even 4♠ has problems with a possible tap.

3N looks 'normal' I guess. Looks like an good hand for a sim; I'll run one this afternoon.


(sorry, disregard some of these - thought Ole's hand didn't have the ♦Q.
---------------

On a similar note, my partner on Monday made a Texas transfer over a 14-16 NT holding xxx QJT9x AKx Jx (?!) for similar reasons as the OP. It actually worked out fine - I held AQx xx Q9xx AQTx - our teammates led a spade from KT9 vs 3N and with the club hook losing, 3N failed (2♠, 2♥, 1♣) (opps didn't find their diamond ruff in 4♥).

This post has been edited by Phil: 2010-August-20, 15:52

[Fluffy]

♠J makes spades really attractive, but those 109 109 do not.

looks like the kind of close decision where the best you can do is do whatever and save energy for next deal.

also worth noting is, did RHO have a chance to double 2/3♣?

I like 5-2 fits more than many I'd probably try 4♠ here too.

[mikeh]

3N for me

We have little reason to fear clubs more in 3N than in 4♠...if he has xxx or Qxx etc, we are surely better off in 3N most of the time...if we have 10 tricks in spades we have to have 9+in notrump.

And xx in clubs isn't fatal to 3N...it is easy to construct hands were we have 9 winners after they take the clubs, but we have a trump loser and get tapped in 4♠.

I won't be surprised to see 4♠ better on some hands, but I would be surprised if a simulation (please...no double dummy results) showed that it was better most of the time.

[hanp]

Agree with mikeh, 4S might well work better but I would certainly bid 3NT. I consider 3NT "normal" and 4S a bit "deep".

[gnasher]

I don't understand why this is even a problem. If partner had transferred to spades and bid 3NT, we'd have passed without thought. Why does the fact that he's a queen weaker make 4♠ more attractive?

[Phil]

8-9 HCP
5 spades
0-3 hearts
0-4 of a minor

3N makes 67% of the time (North)
4♠ makes 44% of the time from North, but 48% of the time from South.

[OleBerg]

Phil, on Aug 21 2010, 12:27 AM, said:

8-9 HCP
5 spades
0-3 hearts
0-4 of a minor

3N makes 67% of the time (North)
4♠ makes 44% of the time from North, but 48% of the time from South.

Forgot to mention that South will declare both contracts.

So at least I didn't hog the hand.

[whereagles]

3NT. This is in jeapordy only if pard has x/xx of clubs. Unlikely, given our strong red suit holdings.

4♠, on the other hand, looks a lot more iffy.

[OleBerg]

rogerclee, on Aug 20 2010, 05:19 PM, said:

I don't understand, we have good club spots, and this is a situation where we could easily be taking 9 tricks without touching spades ever, I mean look at how good our red suits are! Overall I think bidding 4S is ridiculous/horrible/masterminding.

The red suits are securely stopped, but it is 16 out of our 17 points, and still only 5 tricks, admittedly with dvellopping potential.

But any time partner lacks the ♠A and we have only a single clubstopper, we are in trouble even if the red suits come in for 6 tricks, while 4♠ is often a walk in the park all the times partner has 109 or Q10 of spades.

[OleBerg]

gnasher, on Aug 21 2010, 12:26 AM, said:

I don't understand why this is even a problem. If partner had transferred to spades and bid 3NT, we'd have passed without thought. Why does the fact that he's a queen weaker make 4♠ more attractive?

1) It makes it much more likely that spades may not come in.

2) Had partner forced to game, he wouldn't be limited, so up to app. 13 hcp would be possible. This would make it much less attractive to stick your neck out, hoping the spades have enough texture.


For all of you: I'm not so sure 4♠ is right, but I do think some you brushes it off much to easily.

[gnasher]

OleBerg, on Aug 21 2010, 10:03 AM, said:

gnasher, on Aug 21 2010, 12:26 AM, said:

I don't understand why this is even a problem.  If partner had transferred to spades and bid 3NT, we'd have passed without thought.  Why does the fact that he's a queen weaker make 4♠ more attractive?

1) It makes it much more likely that spades may not come in.

2) Had partner forced to game, he wouldn't be limited, so up to app. 13 hcp would be possible. This would make it much less attractive to stick your neck out, hoping the spades have enough texture.

OK, so changing my earlier question:

If partner had transferred to spades and bid 2NT, we'd have bid 3NT without thought. Why does the fact that our system compelled him to bid 3♠ instead make 4♠ more attractive?

[OleBerg]

gnasher, on Aug 21 2010, 12:38 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Aug 21 2010, 10:03 AM, said:

gnasher, on Aug 21 2010, 12:26 AM, said:

I don't understand why this is even a problem.  If partner had transferred to spades and bid 3NT, we'd have passed without thought.  Why does the fact that he's a queen weaker make 4♠ more attractive?

1) It makes it much more likely that spades may not come in.

2) Had partner forced to game, he wouldn't be limited, so up to app. 13 hcp would be possible. This would make it much less attractive to stick your neck out, hoping the spades have enough texture.

OK, so changing my earlier question:

If partner had transferred to spades and bid 2NT, we'd have bid 3NT without thought. Why does the fact that our system compelled him to bid 3♠ instead make 4♠ more attractive?

No, I would have considered something else, like 3♦, figuring partner would bid 3NT with good clubs, and something else with open clubs.

It doesn't solve all problems, and it might not be right, but at least it is consistent. (And it is definitely better than taking the wild stab I did. Hence my ironic comment on my "expert-system".)

[peachy]

Ole, listen to rogerclee and gnasher. They offer you common sense.

[rogerclee]

never mind

[cherdanno]

mikeh, on Aug 20 2010, 03:21 PM, said:

(please...no double dummy results)

Agree, this should unanimous. Oh wait...