[Cyberyeti]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-11, 12:36, said:

For that matter, you can construct many 22-pt hands that would be cold for 6NT opposite that junkpile.

But that's not the point. Or are you suggesting that the present hand with an added jack should also open only 2NT?

Sure the south opening was an overbid. But that contributed 0% to the result.

No but N should only bid 4N, you haven't actually made that yet

[Stephen Tu]

Having already bid 2nt positive, I don't think North should even bother bidding over 3nt. One extra jack with no spots and no shape opposite a partner who declined?

[akwoo]

I don't think 2N was positive but some steps type response.

I also wonder if 4N would have been quantitative (as it should be), or if they were playing it as Blackwood.

[lolocowboy]

We would have ended up in 3 hearts

[neilkaz]

 lolocowboy, on 2020-May-11, 18:28, said:

We would have ended up in 3 hearts

North should invite with 4N.

[AL78]

 bluenikki, on 2020-May-11, 12:36, said:

For that matter, you can construct many 22-pt hands that would be cold for 6NT opposite that junkpile.

But that's not the point. Or are you suggesting that the present hand with an added jack should also open only 2NT?

Sure the south opening was an overbid. But that contributed 0% to the result.

I don't agree. If South had opened 2NT, North would be much less likely to (i.e. almost certinaly won't) blast 6NT. I wouldn't go beyond 3NT with the North hand opposite a 20-22 2NT opener.

[al_terego]

Ty everyone for your opinions/votes

In this very moment are 66.66% North, 33.33% common fault voted, and I will try to close the poll.

Poll

Ill try to make some comments to... some of yours comments.
I didn't do it before to not influence the votes.

I agree with all of you that are criticizing the 4333 shape and the lack of intermediate cards

BUT

# even like this, according with K&R the hand worth 23 (K&R (AK72 A98 A83 AK9) = 23.10)
# if you start to evolve it in 4432 you will get 24 (K&R (AK72 A98 A8 AK93) = 23.95)
# if you continue evolving with 2 10s for example you will get more than 25 (K&R (AKT7 A98 A8 AKT9) = 25.25)

The hand was "accused" by lack of five cards suit. One month ago I would say the very same. Meanwhile I saw some simulations that are proving that a 5 cards suit is good, but not exactly a "God light" as we thought, for the simple reason that imply the presence of a doubleton that cause an eventual vulnerability in that suit, or even a misfit. (I recommend to take a look here, you will find many interesting things: Simulations

Also the hand was "accused" by "Aces and spaces". I agree with that, BUT when a hand like this meet a distributional hand in front? Will be a true faerie, rite? As somebody well pointed facing KQxxx in a red and QJ in spade slam is cold, and I can continue with type of hands with which responder will stay 100% bellow slam opposite 2NT opening: QJx xx xx Qxxxxx OR any combination of red KQ and a black Qxxxxx). When you choose an opening bid you have NO ANY CLUE where the board is going, so, all you can do is to try to describe best possible your hand (yesterday I was smiling when ive opened 2NT with KJ10x AKx AQ KJxx asking myself should this be in the same category with AKxx Axx Axx AKx?)

In the context that we need 34 HCP (in fact 35 for a cold slam - moving ALL highcads ib a hand u need AKQJ AKQ AKQ AKx) with no 5 cards suit aside WHICH is the purpose of an eventual 4NT bid from North as long he KNOW BY SURE that the side strength is 32-33?

Further (I will try to not nominate) I saw people that are considering counting losers on BALANCED hands, that is lets say... a bit unnatural especial if you will base some further evaluations/actions on this.
In the same note, lets assume somebody open absolutely reasonable 1NT with 14 (5 cards suit, a lot of 10 and 9 etc, something that worth 16) and responder bid 6NT with 16 flat, can truly consider that opener is the "murderer" because he opened with "just" 14?

all the best

Florin

[MaxHayden]

You left out a lot of relevant information and it seems like you are actually looking for some kind of validation that you aren't the one at fault. But if you want to get better, "fault" isn't a helpful way of thinking about this. Miscommunication is a 2-way street. Better to understand why it happened and help each partner understand the other's thought process better.

For starters, a 50% slam goes down half the time. Some of those are total face-plants. You are both at the low-end of what the bidding shows, you both have 4333 hands, and south has already stretched to make the bid he did. That face-plant is a lot more likely than not in this situation.

We also don't know what the scoring and vulnerability situation was. Are we supposed to be bidding a slam with 50% odds? Or do we only need 40%? Are we far enough behind in MPs that we need to take some risks to have a good shot a decent result? If we are supposed to be stretching or taking risks, which partner is responsible for that on this bidding? How do you avoid "doubling up" on risk taking?

I also don't understand what you mean with 2NT being a systemic response. Normally 2NT would show 8+ and a balanced hand. But if that's not what it shows for you, I don't know how you can possibly expect us to tell you if anyone was bidding sensibly when we don't know what it actually showed. Both partners should be making inferences in light of bids that weren't made. But what were the other options?

For all we know the real problem is that you haven't actually thought through your bidding here and are flying by the seat of your pants.

That seems pretty likely actually. Your NT structure is already abnormal because of the 3-point 2NT bid (4ish if we factor in that you upgrade with 19). Why do you have that wide range and where did the extra point come from? If you aren't using the 2NT response to 2♣ like most people do, then you are "missing" a bid somewhere. Where did it go? (How do you show 25-27, 28-30, and 31-32? Normally, after a 2♦ negative, these would be 3, 4, and 5NT respectively.)

All of this stuff matters. Bids aren't made in a vacuum. I can't tell you whether someone made a good choice if I don't know what the other choices were. No one made any efforts to find a trump suit. So what kind of inference can I draw? Does that mean that no one has a suit longer than 4 cards? Or is it reasonable to expect 5 card minors with no side-suit shortness? What about semi-balanced hands?

===

Using normal bidding this is what was meant:
S: "I have a hand that is game forcing opposite anything short of a stiff."
N: "Good news! I've got a balanced hand with at least 8 points!"
S: "Well, I've only got 23-24 points in a balanced hand."
N: "Even if you only have 23 points, what I have is usually enough for a slam."

South has 22HCP; north has 9HCP. Combined that's 31HCP. Two points short. But south claimed 23-24HCP. So north thinks they are at only 1 point shy in the worst case.

If south has 24, then with North's 9, they have 33 and should bid a slam. If south has 23, then they are 1 point short. So, on paper, north should invite with 4NT, and south should bid a slam if they have anything above the bare minimum.

By bidding 6NT, north says that with his hand, he doesn't think the difference between 23 and 24 points makes the difference. The slam is 50% either way. So inviting is going to cost points in the long-run because you'll pass too many hands that could make.

If north passes, he's saying that his hand is bad enough that slam isn't a 50% possibility even with a 24HCP maximum in south. North's hand is a pretty bad 9. But the Ks are better than QJs, especially given the control they are providing. And I don't think adding a J to to either side really avoids this train-wreck. Moving the Q and J into ♥ is about as strong as you could get with these cards and it still wouldn't be enough to turn this situation around.

Keep in mind: The hand south had wouldn't make 3NT with the help of 2 queens, but the hand south promised only required one queen for game. North had that queen and both missing kings as a kicker.

So maybe north is right. Only way to know for sure is to simulate a bunch of balanced 23-24HCP hands and see if a slam with north's hand makes 50% of the time. If the thread is right, the slam should be 50% only on the hands that would accept the invite. If he should have passed, then it wouldn't be 50% even with a maximum.

Similarly, if he shades by 2 points and gives a 2♦ negative, south will presumably bid 2NT. But what happens in your bidding if he now shows a "maximum minimum" and invites with 4NT? That's technically not possible given what he already told you. So what would it show? If you don't have some kind of agreement about that sequence, then that probably explains why he didn't try it: you'd probably think he was denying the second king and thus might miss a makeable slam.

So it's plausible that this is the face-plant that your bidding will occasionally produce and not anyone's "fault". At the same time, no trump bidding is supposed to be pretty precise. You quickly describe and limit your hand and partner has access to lots of gadgets to find the right bid. If you play fast and loose, you are giving all of this up. If that means that partner doesn't trust your bidding, then he'll make things up trying to adjust for your erratic behavior, and then you'll both end up in a ditch.

But north isn't the only one who overbid. South has no length, no texture, and is 1HCP shy of what he promised. The hand only has 6 tricks of playing strength and no possibility of developing any extras. This is all well below the norm. He has great controls, but those aces and kings are only valuable when they let you develop other tricks.

So the upgrade from 2NT is marginal at best, especially given that 2NT will right-side the contract in most cases. After a 2NT bid shows a maximum of 22HCP, even with the best 9 HCP hand in the world, north will not invite slam.

There are really only two reasons to upgrade the hand: either south is worried about north failing to invite when he should, or he is worried about missing a makeable game because of a hand that north would usually pass.

You can go simulate a bunch of hands, but you should be visualizing what each other's hands look like. So what were you seeing that made you think you needed to make an adjustment?

I think there are far too many things going on here to make this about blame. Sort out what you were both thinking about when you made those bids and try to get better at understanding one another.