[Lord Molyb]

---

1NT is 12-14
4NT shows a very distributional hand with the minors.
What do you do here?
The vulnerability is wrong in the diagram, you're red on white.

[Mbodell]

Is it MP or IMP. I think I do an in tempo 6♥ but I like it better at MP than IMP.

[Lord Molyb]

It's IMPs

[akwoo]

I bid 5♣. I don't know what it means, and neither does partner, except that it surely is artificial and forcing.

I raise either major to 6 and bid 5♥ over 5♦. Hopefully in the last case partner will figure there is a reason I didn't just bid 5♥ and raise to 6 with a suitable hand.

[Antrax]

Honestly this seems pretty simple. We're missing 13 HCP in the majors. Partner has 12 of them. 6♥ seems like a good spot. No?

[rhm]

Antrax, on 2014-February-23, 02:30, said:

Honestly this seems pretty simple. We're missing 13 HCP in the majors. Partner has 12 of them. 6♥ seems like a good spot. No?

No!

Why should that be the case? Because East 4NT bid shows a lot of minor cards?

Partner has probably a minimum of 5 cards in the minors and at most 8 cards in the majors. Why should partner have all his HCP in the majors?
A priori probability tells me that partner should have about 8 HCP in the majors.
But even if East has say 12 or 13 cards in the minors partner could still have more than 5 cards in the minors.
Since you are missing 10 HCP in the minors and 13 HCP in the majors this also tends to tell you that chances are that partner has some of his points in the minors.
There is just one honor combination ♠AK,♥KQ, while there are many more honor combinations where opener has minor suit honors. If these are lower minor suit honors that will be useless.

Does East bid affect the above probability? Yes, but only slightly, not significantly.
What East bid shows is, that most of the missing 17 minor suit cards (if we give partner 5 minor suit cards) are with East. My guess is East has 12 cards in the minors, probably 6-6, and that means it is very unlikely that any major suit will break well.
6♥ might still make, but it is against the odds.
At Imps I take the money. At MP it is closer, but I would still double.

Rainer Herrmann

[Fluffy]

I expect very bad breaks, I would double and lay there.

 _
|\
  \
    \
    What a pussy

[gwnn]

I'm gonna double everything. I have loads in the minors.

[Antrax]

Rainer, do you think E would bid 4NT over a weak 1NT opener looking at ♠A ♥KQ ♦xxxxx ♣xxxxx ?
The vulnerability is nice, but it's take a huge risk and for what?

I dunno, maybe it's only players in my level, but when it's easy for the opponents to penalize (because they're looking at trump tricks and because there will be no ambiguity about the meaning of double) I try to avoid preempting on crap.

[cherdano]

If partner has wastage in the minors, we should double them in 5m, I'd expect 500-800 while our game might not make. If partner has no wastage in the minors, we will probably make 6M.
If only there was a way to let partner cooperate in the decision whether to double them...

If we double, LHO bids 5m, and partner passes this, how can it be right not to try for slam? Conversely, if he doubles, how can it be right to bid 6♥?
Of course, the auction will not always time out so well (I don't know what to do if it goes X P P 5♣), but it doesn't hurt to try.

Another point: I think we should let partner declare. At least we won't suffer a ruff in the other major at trick one.

[PhilKing]

There's no reason to just assume that all partner's cards are in the majors (although it is quite likely if East is solid). Just double. If Partner doubles 5m, sit it. Even against a rock who holds ♠-♥x♦AQJxxx♣QJxxxx), you can collect 1400 if partner has four trumps.

If partner passes, we can then follow through with our read that he has length and strength in the majors. Don't bid an inept 6♥ though - you may go off on a ruff (and good pairs don't even need to double for the lead). With all the cards now "marked", you have 12 tricks in 6NT.

Edit - Cherdano made the same points at the same time.

[rhm]

Antrax, on 2014-February-23, 06:53, said:

Rainer, do you think E would bid 4NT over a weak 1NT opener looking at ♠A ♥KQ ♦xxxxx ♣xxxxx ?
The vulnerability is nice, but it's take a huge risk and for what?

No, but I never said or implied that. I said I expect East to have 12 cards in the minors.
East does not promise many HCP, e.g. something like ♠x,♥-,♦AJT9xx, ♣JT9xxx would be plenty.
That your construction is not likely does not imply that partner should have all his honors in the major.
West need not be broke. He might well have honors in the majors.

Rainer Herrmann

[ggwhiz]

I'm expecting extreme bad breaks with major suit finesses and or squeeze chances coming home against west.

Very tempting to head for 6nt but will start with 5♣ and should at least get a chance to hammer them at the 6 or even 7 level on these colors.

[gszes]

The lack of partnership agreement has apparently thrown us into
a tizzy. We have 29-31 hcp with a 5 card heart suit but we have
been forewarned that the majors will probably split (very) badly
not to mention that if we play a major from our side the opps
might easily be in a position to get an opening lead ruff in the
other major.
There is no guarantee of safety if we bid so we have to decide
if the somewhat low % of slam probability makes up for the risk
of going down at whatever our resting spot is. That is not all
however---there is apparently no "standard" approach to this
situation and what I thought was the standard approach would not
help a whit here anyway sigh. Combining all of these factors seems
to make the risk vs reward potential too great and I favor

x

[johnu]

ggwhiz, on 2014-February-23, 08:47, said:

I'm expecting extreme bad breaks with major suit finesses and or squeeze chances coming home against west.

What squeeze do you think is remotely likely against west?

[HighLow21]

Wow... This is a tough one. At MPs I might venture 6♥ but we could easily be off a trump and a pointed suit trick, or 2 trumps.

One thing I KNOW we have is 3 minor suit tricks, so at IMPs I am doubling. There's no reason slam is necessarily making and equally no reason they can avoid -4.

[HighLow21]

Antrax, on 2014-February-23, 02:30, said:

Honestly this seems pretty simple. We're missing 13 HCP in the majors. Partner has 12 of them. 6♥ seems like a good spot. No?

Give partner and RHO the following and be prepared to apologize...

Partner:
♠AT75
♥Q74
♦AJ5
♣Q83

RHO:
♠K2
♥-
♦QTxxxx
♣JT9xx

4NT is not a terrible bid White vs. Red with these cards. Now you are probably down 2 while 5 of either minor loses 6 tricks, and maybe 7.

[whereagles]

I don't like guesses, so I'll just take the money

[gnasher]

johnu, on 2014-February-23, 13:42, said:

What squeeze do you think is remotely likely against west?

I'm not sure if it passes the "remotely likely" test, but how about this one?

---

[HighLow21]

gnasher, on 2014-February-23, 14:52, said:

I'm not sure if it passes the "remotely likely" test, but how about this one?

---

No slam here is possible on correct defense due to a lack of major suit entries. Play it out.