have the standards changed

[Nick France]

Playing mps with a reasonable partner you pickup

94
A
9754
QJ9832

Partner opens 1NT (15-17) and the next player passes. What do you
do? Would you bid differently if it was imps (if vulnerabilty matters
please mention that.)


Nick France

[Adam Beneschan]

2S, showing clubs, then 3NT if partner tells me he likes clubs.
Otherwise I think the practical thing is to let him play 3C. At
matchpoints, it may work out best to pass 1NT, but the chance that we
have a decent game, plus the chance that 3C may score as well or
better than 1NT anyway, would prompt me to bid.

I thought about just taking my chances at 3NT, but the fact that my
side entry could get knocked out at trick 1 is a deterrent. I'll
still take that chance if I know partner has a high club honor, but
not if he doesn't.

If you want an answer within the parameters of the system you and your
partner were playing, then you'd better tell us what it is.

-- Adam

[Fred.]

What do standards have to do with how many tricks
you can take when there's a long suit involved?

I don't see the entry to the clubs holding up 50%
of the time or even 40% against good defense though
I could be wrong about the 40%. So I count this as
7 HCP and pass. I don't see this as 3C preemptive
with an almost sure defensive trick.

Make the hand

94
2
9754
AQJ983

and I like 3NT at imps. At match points
I pass and hope that either a major suit
stop is missing or the club king is wrong.

The call nobody should make on either hand is 2NT.
The hand works or it doesn't. Partner's HCP don't
tell you enough to justify the risk of 2NT.

Fred.

[Herb]

I'd take a very conservative approach and bid 2S (Transfer to clubs) and
pass the 3C response. No difference imps or vulnerability. We don't bid
NT with a 5 spades, but might with 5 hearts. More power to those who get
to 3NT when partner holds C AKx

- Herb

[HoneyMonster]

Whatever in our methods gets us to 3C. Trying for 3NT is wildly
optimistic at any form of scoring and vulnerability.

[derek]

It's wildly optimistic for responder. It's fairly simple for
responder to transfer to clubs and for declarer to assess a
probability of making 3N. 2S as a transfer or relay to clubs.

[peter cheung]

pass

[Henry Lockwood]

In my system we have 3C available: it means "Please bid 3NT with Kx or
better clubs". Basically, if partner has a top club and another, we
can likely set up the suit and we're well placed except on a heart
lead. Worth a shot. This also means we play a club partscore when
game isn't making, and that's the safest - so it's even more
attractive at IMPs.

HenryL

[Frances]

On Feb 8, 7:46 pm, Nick France <gandal...@optimum.net> wrote:

At imps I would certainly show this as an invite with long clubs. At
matchponits I might just play in 3C.
(This is in context of not opening 1NT with a 5-card major).

Some of the time I go off in 3NT with a club fit the opponents have
been stopped from finding their major suit partial (or game).

[Nick France]

Not worried about parameters of the system but what you think the hand
is worth so your answerwas relevant. Basically I figure there are 5
possible answers

1) Pass
2) bid 3NT
3) general invite without really showing clubs
4) Transfer to clubs and pass
5) Transfer to clubs and bid game if partner likes it

I will explain later why I posted the question but for now just want
to see what the general opinion is.

Nick France

[Frances]

p.s. the advantage of showing clubs at either matchpoints or imps is
that you play in 3C opposite, say,

KQxx
Kxxx
AKx
10x

which is going to score a lot better than playing in 1NT

[Lorne]

"Nick France" wrote in message
news:a7c86d53-7cd3-47ad...@c20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

..............................................

Show my club suit and play 3N if partner shows interest but 3C if he does
not.

[Paul Hightower]

"Nick France" <gand...@optimum.net> wrote in message
news:a7c86d53-7cd3-47ad...@c20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

I have seen evidence that a six-card suit like this is worth only about a
point when considering 3NT. That makes this equal to about 8 hcp, so I won't
invite game. I'll use my 2S gadget to sign off at 3C, expecting the six-card
suit to provide 3 or 4 tricks that partner won't get playing notrump.

Note that even when the clubs can be established, the defense will often
find 5 tricks before partner can claim nine. He needs a high club AND three
quick tricks on the side, along with either enough length in clubs to
provide a late entry, or the good fortune of a non-deadly lead. Although
it's easy to picture
AK Kxx J10xx Kxxx (only 14) I believe in practice 3NT is odds-against. It
would be interesting to see a simulation on these specific cards.

[OldPalooka]

Possibly add 6) Transfer to clubs and try to determine between 5C and
3NT if partner likes. This is close to 5C if partner is lacking heart
cards. Not a viable match point solution.

[Nick France]

> cards.  Not a viable match point solution.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

A possiblity I hadn't considered thanks

Nick France

[Andrew]

There are two dimensions to this question:

1. Valuation
In terms of values, is the hand NF, invitational for forcing?
The hand is clearly invitational in values, although for tactical
reasons we may choose to overbid. For example, behind in a KO match, a
jump to 3NT has something going for it.

2. Description
Should I describe or blast?
Holding a stiff, I think it is right to describe by showing long clubs
and an invite. Missing two top club honors, the chance of running six
clubs off the top is small, so one of the ways a blast can win (run
the first 9 after a poor lead) is unlikely.

[Nick France]

I want to thank everyone who responded. The hand was taking from
Winning Notrump Leads by Bird and Anthias and was used in an example
of 1NT-3NT. The book itself uses double dummy analysis to discover
what opening lead is best for a given hand. I found it hard to
believe that he would use such a poor example of a 3NT bid to
illustrate a lead and just wanted to make sure that the standard for a
direct raise to 3NT hadn't dropped.

Nick France

[Frances]

Ah well, that is a different question.

I was sufficiently interested in this to run a small, non-double-dummy
simulation. I used a definition of a strong 1NT reasonably close to
how I play it, i.e.

15-17 4432 or 4333 any suits
14-16 5- or 6- card minor (any 5332/6322 with a long minor, or
specifically 2425 or 2245)

this definition includes a few hands I wouldn't open 1NT (e.g. Qx QJx
AKx Qxxxx or AK10x AK10x K10x 10x) but is not far out.

I looked at two strategies: invite showing clubs (playing in 3C or
3NT) or raise to 3NT. I used a previous definition I'd had of
'liking' clubs as opener, namely holding Axx, Kxx or better as
'liking' and anything else as a rejection.

I then looked at the hands and decided what I thought would happen
based on single dummy play and defence.

Out of the first 50 hands I dealt:

21 of them you won't have an uncontested auction if you start by
showing clubs. On about 8 of these hands you are better off raising
1NT directly to 3NT as a pre-empt (and if you bid 1NT P 3NT dbl, it's
right to pull it as responder as it's off in my simulation) as you are
saving against either 4major making or 3major making. On the others
someone is going to bid anyway.

10 you will make 3NT
7 of them you will go between 1 and 3 off in 3NT
5 of them it's about 50:50 whether you make or not (either declarer or
defenders or both have a choice of lines)
7 times you will make 3C; on none of those was 3NT making

So, particularly if you are at favourable, there's something to be
said for raising directly to 3NT. Make the hand

x
xx
x
QJxxxxxx

and you'd get quite a lot of support for an immediate 3NT bid NV
against V (even more if you play weak NT!)

p.s. I think this type of hand - with a long suit and a short entry -
is a very poor candidate for double-dummy analysis, because there is
likely to be a huge difference between double-dummy and singleton
dummy play. Typical example for declarer: he has Axx clubs, does he
play for clubs 2-2 with the king onside, or does he set up the suit
and hope a side suit can't be run?

[Nick France]

> and hope a side suit can't be run?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

They used 5000 hands for each West hand on lead. What bothered me was
their use of this dummy for an example since it isn't a clear 3NT bid
to me. One of the problems I have been having with the book is
duplicating the results. Their results are consistantly higher than
mine which means their standards for raising to 3NT is extremely
liberal. (and probably for opening 1NT with a stated range of 15-17).
I have found some of the results seem to depend on how liberal the
oponents are to raise directly to 3NT.

For those interested the example was taken from Hand #7 in chapter two
where west holds

T85
QT943
AKJ3
6

I dont have Kurt's confidence is the single dummy programs out to test
the results of the book that way but they have come up with some
interesting conclusions which I know are being talked about in the New
York Area. Whether or not they become part of expert play is still a
very open issue.

Nick France

[Thomas Dehn]

This depends on vulnerability, opponents, and form of scoring.

When responder bids 3NT directly, this can win the following ways:
o 3NT actually makes
o 3NT does not make, but it preempts opponents out
of a making partscore or game.

As Frances already wrote, when nonvul, raising to
3NT on a weak hand with a long minor is a successful approach,
especially playing weak NT where opponents might
easily have a game.

I would not raise to 3NT on the example hand
because of the singleton HA, but I would raise
to 3NT on the similar xx,Ax,xxx,QJ98xx.



Thomas

[Charles Brenner]

On Feb 8, 11:46 am, Nick France <gandal...@optimum.net> wrote:

Invite in clubs; settle for 3C if partner declines.

At IMPs this strategy may be too conservative, but I don't know any
better so it's still my guess. Angling for 5C is too tough for me. At
MP my reservation is the risk of playing clubs for +110 instead of 2NT
for +120. But let that slide.

Charles

[Frances]

If I were writing a book looking at DD analysis for defending 3NT, I'd
be pretty liberal with my raises too. One of the problems is that the
auction 1NT-3NT has a tendency to make at least 9 tricks easily or,
failing that, the opening leader has a good suit to lead, and leads
it, and the contract goes boringly off and you haven't learnt anything
either. I played 84 boards this weekend, and I don't think the choice
of opening lead against that auction (or a similar auction going via
Stayman) affected whether the contract made or not once. It had an
impact on overtricks a couple of times.

>
> For those interested the example was taken from Hand #7 in chapter two
> where west holds
>
> T85
> QT943
> AKJ3
> 6
>
> I dont have Kurt's confidence is the single dummy programs out to test
> the results of the book that way but they have come up with some
> interesting conclusions which I know are being talked about in the New
> York Area.  Whether or not they become part of expert play is still a
> very open issue.
>

> Nick France- Hide quoted text -

[Nick France]

On Feb 13, 5:32 am, Frances <franceshin...@googlemail.com> wrote:

>
> If I were writing a book looking at DD analysis for defending 3NT, I'd
> be pretty liberal with my raises too.  One of the problems is that the
> auction 1NT-3NT has a tendency to make at least 9 tricks easily or,
> failing that, the opening leader has a good suit to lead, and leads
> it, and the contract goes boringly off and you haven't learnt anything
> either.  I played 84 boards this weekend, and I don't think the choice
> of opening lead against that auction (or a similar auction going via
> Stayman) affected whether the contract made or not once. It had an
> impact on overtricks a couple of times.
>

The book makes the same point you do in many cases. It shows the % of
times each card beats the contract. Its not so important how many
times the lead beats a contract as how much better than another lead
it is For example how much is the major suit 'bias' is with certain
hands.

Nick France

[Michael Tsang]

2S (transfer clubs)