[Gpm_bg]

some of players make stayman even with 3-3-3-4 or 3-3-4-3 expect ops to follow that conclusion

[whereagles]

Chamaco, on Aug 28 2006, 10:24 AM, said:

Say that your 11 count is the following:

AK32
875
A73
982

Then despite the 4333 shape, there is the likelihood that a suit contract will play better (sometimes even in a Moysian fit, although I am not suggesting we should look for one with this hand).

Why is it that a suit contract will play better? I fail to see why.

[Free]

whereagles, on Aug 28 2006, 03:56 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Aug 28 2006, 10:24 AM, said:

Say that your 11 count is the following:

AK32
875
A73
982

Then despite the 4333 shape, there is the likelihood that a suit contract will play better (sometimes even in a Moysian fit, although I am not suggesting we should look for one with this hand).

Why is it that a suit contract will play better? I fail to see why.

Are you serious? Does your partner never have QJxx-xx-KQJx-AKx with opponents ready to take 5 ♥ tricks? Nevertheless, it's a rare occasion and LHO still has to lead ♥, but it's quite simple to find examples (reverse ♥ and ♣ and you have another one). But then again, there are many examples that conclude 3NT is a better contract...

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Aug 28 2006, 02:56 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Aug 28 2006, 10:24 AM, said:

Say that your 11 count is the following:

AK32
875
A73
982

Then despite the 4333 shape, there is the likelihood that a suit contract will play better (sometimes even in a Moysian fit, although I am not suggesting we should look for one with this hand).

Why is it that a suit contract will play better? I fail to see why.

Lack of intermediate and great controls/quick tricks are generally referred to as good indicators that the hand is suit-oriented.

In this case, of course, there is also a reverse indicator, e.g. 4333 shape is generally referred to as a good indicator that the hand is NT oriented.

So here we have 2 conflicting indicators, one pointing towards suit cotract (or at least towards its investigation via Stayman), and another pointing towards a 3NT signoff bid.

Personally - for what is worth - in light of the above reasons, with

AK32
875
A73
982

I would strongly recommend using stayman,
whereas with

KT92
JT9
A73
KTx

I would signoff in 3NT.

I hope I was clearer now

[ochinko]

Gpm_bg, on Aug 28 2006, 05:46 PM, said:

some of players make stayman even with 3-3-3-4 or 3-3-4-3 expect ops to follow that conclusion

I don't fool my partner just to fool the opponents too. Must have a better reason for that.

What if partner is 4-4 in the majors, and corrects your 3NT to 4S after 1NT - 2C - 2H - 3NT?

[Gpm_bg]

All depends of style for opening 1NT

Using 5-4-2-2 6-3-2-2 or sort of combinations make desicion harder.


with hand like AKxx AQx KJx 10xx i would open 1♣ and rebid 2♠

something like mine own desicion but i like to ensure partner that we are not truly vulnerable of any of suit.
opening NT is as level high who stop oponents to show natural suit at 1st level but same and for partner

opening 1♣ or 1♦ gave more freedom for understanding on safety level with partner.

like 1♣ -> 1♦ -> 1♥/♠ -> 1NT many information

even 1♣ 1♥/♠ 1NT - 2♣/♦ checkbacks, which is better then simply 1nt opening

[whereagles]

Chamaco, on Aug 28 2006, 03:11 PM, said:

So here we have 2 conflicting indicators, one pointing towards suit cotract (or at least towards its investigation via Stayman), and another pointing towards a 3NT signoff bid.

There are more NT indicators, namely that having top tricks indicates the possibility of being able to run 9 tricks from top.

But anyway, it's difficult to gauge how important pros and cons are. The only way to sort this out would be to run a simulation.

[Chamaco]

whereagles, on Aug 28 2006, 03:26 PM, said:

There are more NT indicators, namely that having top tricks indicates the possibility of being able to run 9 tricks from top.

In my experience, what you say here usually applies when you have a long suit (6+ cards) that - thanks to the top controls -can be expected to run for no losers, hence a NT contract is quite good.

But when your longest suit is 4 cards (sometimes even 5), then having good controls (AK) and no quacks tends to increase the chances that a suit contract plays better (because the 3rd round loser can often be ruffed in a suit contract, so the suit will have no losers).

That's why I am arguing that when we do have 2 flat hands facing each other, AKs are generally a suit contract indicator.

But I guess none of us is a Meckwell nor a Bocchi Duboin

[ochinko]

Gpm_bg, on Aug 28 2006, 06:25 PM, said:

with hand like AKxx AQx KJx 10xx i would open 1♣ and rebid 2♠

That seems very wrong to me. It is a textbook 1NT opening if I ever saw one. Why would you lie both about your strength and your distribution?

When you hear 1H from your partner he could very well have 5 of them. You bid 2S, and you end in 5C in no time with 4 clubs in partner's hand. They'll go down when you could make 3NT or 4H, or make when everyone else made 6H. Or fail in 6C when there were 7H. Or you could have only 9 tricks, but end up in 4S. Such bidding begs for one disaster or another.