[mikl_plkcc]

We had a disaster board in tonight's session:

---

We sat at EW. Optimum contract was NS 4♥ which the opponents were the only pair who could bid it. 5 out of 7 tables ended up at 1NTW-3 or 1NTW-4 which meant -300 or -400, but we got -620 because they made 4♥ which was a bottom.

Was this disaster caused by using a strong NT instead of weak NT? (It is the UK which I suppose weak NT is the norm.)

[steve2005]

If 1NW is -3 or -4 I think 3N is a better contract for NS than a 4-3 4♥!
Not even mentioning 1NXW -3 or 4!!!

[gszes]

probably. Bear in mind you cannot beat this game only play it. Watch how your methods play out over time and decide on the best course of action. If you are constantly being hammered by a weak nt and seeing little benefit to strong change if you must but, do not let one hand consume all of your learning.

[Cyberyeti]

Games on 4/5 finesses are not ones you want to be in, you will gain in the long run. You got unlucky this time, next time partner will ruff the third club and the spade and diamond Qs will be switched.

[LBengtsson]

some bidding methods lose boards, some bidding methods win boards. as cyberyeti says 'it is a poor game for n/s' but every so often the bridge gods allow a poor game to make. and it is not your fault...

[AL78]

As someone who plays a strong NT in the UK where most play weak NT, these sort of bottoms come up every now and then. Other classics include wrong siding the contract, or opening a suit on a weak NT hand allows the opponents to overcall on a hand they would not over a 1NT opening. You have to take it on the chin and move on, it is part of the random element in bridge. As others have said, if you think one of your methods is sub-optimal, you need to analyse results with it over a large number of boards.

[Douglas43]

I reckon the differences are pretty marginal, so wouldn't over-think it. Ask yourself, and your partner, which style you enjoy more and feel most comfortable with.

[nige1]

mikl_plkcc 'We had a disaster board in tonight's session: We sat at EW. Optimum contract was NS 4♥ which the opponents were the only pair who could bid it. 5 out of 7 tables ended up at 1NTW-3 or 1NTW-4 which meant -300 or -400, but we got -620 because they made 4♥ which was a bottom. Was this disaster caused by using a strong NT instead of weak NT? (It is the UK which I suppose weak NT is the norm.)
++++++++++++++++++
Opponents were lucky. 4♥ is a poor contract.

---

[pescetom]

Douglas43, on 2021-September-10, 09:41, said:

I reckon the differences are pretty marginal, so wouldn't over-think it. Ask yourself, and your partner, which style you enjoy more and feel most comfortable with.

I reckon it merits serious thought.
My experience playing strong NT in a strong NT field is that the few weak NT pairs enjoy many easy windfalls.
I have no idea how the opposite works out, but instinct says that the few strong NT pairs in a weak NT field might enjoy the same, if the opposition is equally unprepared (maybe it is not, or maybe those going against the wind have less idea what they are doing).

[Tokyo007]

I'm with all the others. You can't be entirely results based on such a small sample (1 hand). I got nailed the other day because opps punted a 70% 7S vs a 98% 6N (needed to drop a Q in one suit and J in another). Sometimes it just happens.

Hiw did you fare overall?