[AL78]

This was the last hand of the evening. I thought we had been duffed up enough to put a real downer on our score, so after picking up this freak, took a big flyer for a top, which didn't work out.

---

5 card majors, weak NT, 1♣ could be short.

Things started off well when South led their singleton diamond, and partner cashed two clubs throwing the singleton spade. Things deteriorated when she then ran the ♥J round to the queen, then on the diamond return, discarded allowing South to ruff low, then North got a club ruff when she ruffed low. Three off for not a good score (although not a bottom, a couple bid the slam going off).

It turned out our final score wasn't as bad as I expected, so I should have just settled for 4♥ which should make, and would have been a good score anyway.

The top score went to those pairs which found 3NT, which were the two only plus scores for EW.

[TylerE]

4NT is an overbid of truly titanic proportions.

[pescetom]

 AL78, on 2020-January-25, 15:45, said:

The top score went to those pairs which found 3NT, which were the two only plus scores for EW.

Had West bid a 3S splinter rather than 4NT from Mars, then 3NT might suddenly have looked attractive.

[nige1]

AL78 2This was the last hand of the evening. I thought we had been duffed up enough to put a real downer on our score, so after picking up this freak, took a big flyer for a top, which didn't work out. 5 card majors, weak NT, 1♣ could be short. Things started off well when South led their singleton diamond, and partner cashed two clubs throwing the singleton spade. Things deteriorated when she then ran the ♥J round to the queen, then on the diamond return, discarded allowing South to ruff low, then North got a club ruff when she ruffed low. Three off for not a good score (although not a bottom, a couple bid the slam going off). It turned out our final score wasn't as bad as I expected, so I should have just settled for 4♥ which should make, and would have been a good score anyway. The top score went to those pairs which found 3NT, which were the two only plus scores for EW."
+++++++++++++++++++++++
AL78's Partner might justify AL78's optimism by ruffing North's ♦ return and then South's ♣ return

---

[akwoo]

Assume you're in a partnership where, after 1♣-1♦-1♥, all your spade bids are natural. In other words, you're not playing any form of 4th suit forcing nor any splinters. (Presumably, this is because partner is a (life) novice who hasn't learned or can't remember these conventions.)

Then you're choosing between 4♥ and 4N, and I think 4N is a worthwhile gamble.

[FelicityR]

 akwoo, on 2020-January-25, 18:27, said:

Assume you're in a partnership where, after 1♣-1♦-1♥, all your spade bids are natural. In other words, you're not playing any form of 4th suit forcing nor any splinters. (Presumably, this is because partner is a (life) novice who hasn't learned or can't remember these conventions.)

Then you're choosing between 4♥ and 4N, and I think 4N is a worthwhile gamble.

Yes, I agree. Given that less-experienced players jump to 4NT far too often, it's not as bad as first seems especially if you are using RKCB Blackwood where you can establish if partner has two aces and the queen of trumps, or three aces, in one bid.

However, it's a mighty ask to be able to control the hand with the (potential) lack of entries after drawing trumps, even taking account of a favourable 3-2 trump split. So bidding 4♥ is as good as it gets in the absence of any gadgets or conventions.

[pescetom]

 FelicityR, on 2020-January-26, 00:51, said:

So bidding 4♥ is as good as it gets in the absence of any gadgets or conventions.

I can understand being without splinters or an artificial 4SF. But some form of checkback should be part of the toolkit of any intermediate player IMO, natural bidding has just too many limits in these situations as this example reminds us.

[Cyberyeti]

What do you think 4♦ would mean over 1♥ ? I think there's a good case for it being this sort of thing.

[apollo1201]

 Cyberyeti, on 2020-January-26, 09:38, said:

What do you think 4♦ would mean over 1♥ ? I think there's a good case for it being this sort of thing.

Yeah, same pattern but a bit weaker as 1D-1H-4D as opener. I’d almost try it undiscussed (what else can it be...).

[AL78]

I did consider a 3♠ splinter, but didn't think partner's possible responses would tell me much, and I decided to go with RCKB since with two key cards and the ♥Q, slam should be decent, and with two key cards and no Q, it will likely be around 50% in which case do I feel lucky. I was disappointed that partner only had one key card. Someone has pointed out that partner could respond 3NT to a spade splinter, which I hadn't thought of at the time, and which would alert me to huge wastage opposite, which would temper my (over) enthusiasm. The lack of a spade overcall by the opposition should have alerted me to the possibility of spade wastage opposite. So yes, a poor show by me.

[msjennifer]

Sir.ithe 4NT bid is ,in my personal opinion, an over exhuberant bid. If the partnership is playing a 3H bid as GF then I would bid that.A 3S bid solves the problem to some extent. We would require two honors support for a secondary suit in order to bid 3S when playing Precision.Bidding 4H means taking the reins in ones hand since opener will never know our singleton spade wherein we can make 6 hearts even with an appropriate minimum opener.Playing a Standard system I certainly would have preferred to bid 3S.

[nudnikbp]

East would bid the same way with four clubs headed by the K-Q-J, so 4NT looks like an overbid.

[pigpenz]

 pescetom, on 2020-January-25, 17:13, said:

Had West bid a 3S splinter rather than 4NT from Mars, then 3NT might suddenly have looked attractive.

I agree 3♠

[helene_t]

 Cyberyeti, on 2020-January-26, 09:38, said:

What do you think 4♦ would mean over 1♥ ? I think there's a good case for it being this sort of thing.

Maybe. If you play strong jump shifts (or some system in which 3♦ at your second turn would be forcing), then certainly yes.

OTOH, if your only way to force with diamonds goes through FSF, especially if FSF is 2♠ now, then I think it's reasonable to play 4♦ as natural.

[cherdano]

 AL78, on 2020-January-25, 15:45, said:

Things started off well when South led their singleton diamond, and partner cashed two clubs throwing the singleton spade. Things deteriorated when she then ran the ♥J round to the queen, then on the diamond return, discarded allowing South to ruff low, then North got a club ruff when she ruffed low. Three off for not a good score (although not a bottom, a couple bid the slam going off).

It turned out our final score wasn't as bad as I expected, so I should have just settled for 4♥ which should make, and would have been a good score anyway.

Why would 4♥ have made? Not ruffing in on the ♦return is an inexplicable error that had nothing to do with your bidding.