[lmilne]

It seems (without sims to back me up) that a sound 8 or 9 card minor fit will often have better chances than 6NT, even with both opener and responder holding balanced hands.

So, how crazy is it to have some system after 1NT-4NT to find these fits?

I'm not sure what the standard is for non-6NT continuations after this start (maybe showing number of aces along the way?) but it seems like there is better stuff. I mean, its standard for opener to show a decent 5 or 6 card minor along the way to 6NT (e.g. 1NT-4NT-6C) but its not standard to do anything but pass or bid 6NT with e.g. 2=3=4=4 shape, where responder's failure to Stayman means there will often be a minor suit fit.

A simple scheme might be

1NT-4NT:
5♠ = one minor, responder can relay with 5NT to find out which
5NT = both minors
6-suit = 5+ natural.

The main worry is that opener will give opponents unnecessary information about his hand when he is likely to play 6NT anyway, e.g. 1NT-4NT-5♠ (one minor)-5NT-6♦-6NT would be a small disaster. So you could take it further and play some sort of transfer scheme so responder plays all possible 6m contracts...

1NT-4NT:
5♥ one or more 4-card minor
.....-5♠ I have clubs (and possibly diamonds)
..........-5NT So do I (bid 6C)
..........-6C Only diamonds (bid 6D if you like diamonds)

.....-5NT I have diamonds (not clubs), bid 6C if you do too
..........-6C So do I (bid 6D)
5NT 5+ clubs
6♣ 5+ diamonds
6NT normal

This is probably crazy and unnecessary, just musing. Basically it seems like there will be a toss-up between bidding accuracy and avoiding revealing declarer's hand shape unneccesarily (and also forgetting system), but I haven't heard of anyone really doing much system in this area.

edit: maybe opener should be playing the hand more often as responder has already revealed hand shape info i.e. unlikely to have 4+major?

[kenrexford]

Just out of curiosity, why are you using artificiality when artificiality seems rather unnecessary?

I mean, a fairly simple scheme:

1NT-P-4NT-P-?

5♣ = 4+ clubs
5♦ = 4+ diamonds
5♥ = 5 hearts
5♠ = 5 spades
5NT = 4-4 minors
6♣ = six clubs
6♦ = six diamonds
(6M = six of these)

When Opener bids 5C, Responder could bid 5♦ naturally (in case Opener has 4-5 in minors) or 5NT, allowing Opener to rebid 6♣ with five clubs.

When Opener bids 5♦, Responder could bid 5NT to allow Opener to rebid 6♦ with five diamonds, or 6♣ in case Opener is 5-4 in minors.

I'm not saying that this is the best, either. But, if natural works, why use some sort of contorted artificiality?!?!?

[Jlall]

Agree with kenrexford, I think natural is fine and can help you find good major suit fits also (strong 5-2, strong 4-3, or 5-3) when it's right.

[lmilne]

My point was that no one actually does Ken's suggestion (bidding suits on the way to accepting), except when they have a specific reason (often a good five card suit). In 5 years playing the game, I've never seen anyone (including at world championship level) bid anything other than pass or 6NT holding something like 2344, except to check aces along the way.

I agree that natural 'works' and that there isn't a strong need for artificial stuff. But there seems to be a non-trivial problem with opener showing a suit every time he has one (e.g. bidding 5C on every non-min 4432 with 4 clubs), giving the opponents extra information about the unseen hands. The system I was suggesting tries to avoid these problems somewhat by making the hand that has given less info away play the hand.

Perhaps something better would be using some bid after 1NT-4NT to get responder to show suits rather than opener. Then, even when opener plays 6NT there is a minimum amount of info given away.

edit: Just to make clear, I'm more concerned with whether looking for fits is a good idea or not in these auctions, especially 4-4 fits. Once that question is settled, the system you use to find those fits is probably irrelevant as long as you can remember it, as the tiny gains/losses from right-siding etc aren't hugely important.

[Jlall]

lmilne, on Apr 10 2010, 11:43 PM, said:

My point was that no one actually does Ken's suggestion (bidding suits on the way to accepting), except when they have a specific reason (often a good five card suit). In 5 years playing the game, I've never seen anyone (including at world championship level) bid anything other than pass or 6NT holding something like 2344, except to check aces along the way.

What? It is completely standard for good north american players at least, it is weird to me that you've never seen it. Bidding 6N with 2344 is horrible, it is very common to play the 4-4 fit. With (432)4 I would almost always bid 5C also.

[lmilne]

Jlall, on Apr 11 2010, 12:01 AM, said:

lmilne, on Apr 10 2010, 11:43 PM, said:

My point was that no one actually does Ken's suggestion (bidding suits on the way to accepting), except when they have a specific reason (often a good five card suit).  In 5 years playing the game, I've never seen anyone (including at world championship level) bid anything other than pass or 6NT holding something like 2344, except to check aces along the way.

What? It is completely standard for good north american players at least, it is weird to me that you've never seen it. Bidding 6N with 2344 is horrible, it is very common to play the 4-4 fit. With (432)4 I would almost always bid 5C also.

I play in New Zealand where everyone is dreadful, and my international experience has been junior stuff, so maybe it's the player pool around here. When I was thinking about this the other day it seemed revolutionary to me because I've never seen anyone do it, but it certainly doesn't surprise me that people are *gasp* finding fits.

To be fair, I was mostly remembering a hand from the u-28 pairs final in Beijing where a 'good' player (don't remember exactly who) bid 6NT with a 4432 and a minor.

[dbsboy]

I play 1NT - 4♠ as quantitative+, so opener bid 4N with no slam interest, or bid a suit on the 4 level something like Baron responses. Anywayz responder can still bid a suit on the 5 level even if opener has a minimum. I think it is very important to be able to play in 6 minor when there is a fit, but since I dont have any relay bids following up stayman, I am quite comfortable with this 1N-4♠ ask.

I actually want to use your thread to ask a question about a gadget I am playing now. I play 2N-4♠ as an invite with 4+ controls, and 4NT as an invite with less than 4 controls. Actually I do not know if its useful, but I often open 2NT with 19 pts and a 6 card minor. I wonder if this gadget can help me reach more 28-hcp minor slam.

[FrancesHinden]

I think you are going about this slightly backwards.

In the abstract, it's true that a 4-4 fit is likely to produce an extra trick, so 6m in a fit may be a better spot than 6NT.

However, why start looking for a 4-4 fit at the 5-level?

As responder, if you have slam invitational values, start looking for a minor suit fit earlier, using whatever methods you like. 1NT - 4NT should be restricted to a fairly set of hands which do not think 6m is a sensible possibilty in a 4-4 fit.

I'm not going to tell you what methods to use, just that if you are writing system you should start somewhere lower than 4NT. If you are serious about system, there's something to be said for playing 1NT - 4NT as a direct ace ask (which comes in handy occasionally) and putting strong balanced hands through some sort of control/shape asking relay.

[This is also my objection to the popular "5NT pick a slam" approach. I'd rather sort out strain a bit lower than the 6-level, so my 5NT bids are generally only pick-a-slam in compressed competitive auctions.]

[helene_t]

yellow rose extension of quant 4nt: http://www.bridgeguys.com/LittleKnown/Yell...asKleinman.html