[RunemPard]

Hey all,

Would like to work on my bidding after a quantitative NT invite w/ a (14+)15-17 NT that may have 5M, 6m, 22(54), or very rarely a 44(41). What do most of you use for replies to a quantitative invite. Should only "special" hands be described to conceal lead information, or is it considered good to show as much as possible for finding the best slam?

There doesn't seem to be much room to include too many possible hand types using 1 hand type with each bid, but is there an optimal relay type way to show as many as possible? My thoughts (which are quickly thrown together and probably horrible!)...

1N-4N; 5C - one or both minors(4 card) or 5cM
- 5D - asking
- - 5H - 5H
- - 5S - 5S
- - 5N - 4/4 minors
- - 6C - 4C
- - 6D - 4D

1N-4N; 5D - 5cm or 5/4 minors
- 5H - asking
- - 5S - 2245 (5C)
- - 5N - 2254 (5D)
- - 6C - 5C
- - 6D - 5D

1N-4N; 5H - 44(41)
- 5S - asking for single minor
- - 5N - single C
- - 6C - single D

1N-4N; 5S - 6cm
- 5N - asking
- - 6C - 6C
- - 6D - 6D



Again, these are just replies I put together in 5 mins to put my thoughts into perspective. I am interested in easy and simple methods and complex. As of now, we have nothing.

Thanks for the help,

Don

[TylerE]

I think this is one of those cases where simple is best...

5x shows a suit (not just length, should have trick potential.... AJxxx or so at minimum)...this is ONLY if you're unsure whether or not to accept the invite...the goal is to help partner visualize tricks.

Otherwise just pass or bid 6N.

Really the most important thing is to figure out your style.

Either invite marginally and only accept with the nuts, or invite heavy and go with anything other than an ugly minimum.

[steve2005]

While your system is nice I agree with Tyler, this high keep it simple.

If you really want to find out this more complicated information perhaps you should be going thru Stayman (or Puppet Stayman or a 2♠ Range ask), then there is lots of space to find a fit at a low level then investigate slam.

[P_Marlowe]

4NT is asking for min max.
Next it tells opener, that responder has non interest in another strain.
If you want, you can answer Key cards, to avoid off 2 Aces.

The system you outlined should be starting over 1NT by responder, if
you want to go scientific.
At the end the frequency of this kind of auction is low, so keep it simple.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mgoetze]

I like natural:

Pass - decline
5♣ - accept, suggests playing in clubs
5♦ - accept, suggests playing in diamonds
5♥ - accept, suggest playing in hearts
5♠ - accept, suggests playing in spades.

If you like you can even play 5m as a 5-card minor and 6m as a 6-card minor.

[gszes]

Hard to imagine a 6 card m not wanting to accept to at least 6m so
that hand is out. If p wanted to find out a 5M they probably could have
used puppet. The main theme here should be trying to find out if a control
rich minimum fits well enough with partner to maybe play 6m. The downside
of such further exploration is the bidding will go beyond 4n to at least 5n
which is slightly more dangerous if slam is not found.

I have found a very simple set of responses to allow for such a search

5c = 5 clubs and an unspecified 4 card major
5d asks which
5h = h
5s = s
responder now places the contract

5d = 5 diamonds and an unspecified 4M
5h asks which
5s = h
5n = s
responder now places the contract

5h = 5 clubs and 4 dia responder now places the contract

5s = 5 diamonds and 4 clubs responder now places the contract

5n = 4333 (with 4M) wants to accept but tepid distribution downgrades
hand somewhat. Responder now places the contract.

These hand types do not occur much but the accuracy of the responses will
normally allow responder to make a very informed decision. Note that all
of these hands (except the 5n hand) would be more than happy to accept
if they were not minimum and the extra distribution alleviates at least
most of the danger of being at the 5 level if slam is not reached.

The other consideration is that these "long" suits are probably not of
high quality since AKJx xx AQJxx xx would more than likely be bid by starting
with 1d rather than 1n so responder will need to fill in openers suits a fair
amount.

The other downside of slam pursuit is that opener's hand becomes an open book
and we just have to hope that slamming the opps with the bidding will win out more
often than the opps setting us playing seeing eye defense (I feel it is worth it).

[ArtK78]

As others have said, keep it simple. Don't spend a lot of time and energy providing for sequences that come up once every two to three years.

However, I do recommend one change that will help you out, no matter what type of sequences you employ after the invite.

Assuming that 4♠ over your natural notrump opening or rebid (such as after a 2♣ opening) is an unused bid, you should use the unsued 4♠ bid to better define your quantitative invites:

1) Use 4♠ for the weaker invite - requests partner to accept only if he is at the top of his range;

2) Use 4NT for the stronger invite - requests partner to accept unless he is at the bottom of his range.

I don't know of any theoretical merit to using 4♠ for the weaker invite and 4NT for the stronger invite - it just seems easier to remember (higher equals stronger). Feel free to reverse the two if you like.

This came up last night in an ACBL game on BBO, and we got to a good 6NT. The fact that 6NT was doomed on the lie of the cards is not the point, but I got the defense to err and made it anyway.

[PhilKing]

Meta rule:

In response to quant 4NT, all continuations are natural if that is rational, except 5NT, which is "pick a slam". (In sequences where the continuation could not possibly be natural, things get rather more contentious).

In this context, a bid of 5♣, for instance, would be constructive, but not forcing. In a strong NT context, a typical hand would be dodgy 14 count with 6 clubs or a decent 15 with 5.