[skjaeran]

Scoring: IMP

p - 2NT
3♠ - 3NT
4♦ - 4NT
p

---

2NT=22-24
3♠=both minors, slam try
3NT=s/o
4♦=not dead yet
4NT=s/o
p=reluctantly

Who's most to blame for this disaster?

[skjaeran]

Deleted

[ceeb]

East.

3NT is already questionable. 4NT is highly craven. I don't think West can be blamed for giving up at that point.

It's a tough hand though. If the partnership had brightly bid to 6♣ I'd probably agree with their judgment more, but it's only marginally better than the actual contract. Finding 6NT (or 6♦) requires genius.

[han]

West, 3NT is clear and I don't mind 4NT.

I don't understand 4D and I think west should force to slam.

[655321]

What was 4♦?

Perhaps now East thought West was 54 in the minors, hence no fit. Although, if West was very keen on slam with no more minor suit length than 54, perhaps East with his giant hand could cooperate anyway.
What would 4♥ instead of 4♦ have shown?

[skjaeran]

4♥ would have been a better bid than 4♦ - no firm agreement there, but most probably would be assumed by both to be singleton and 55.

[Impact]

With the West hand I would push with 5NT as
a) HQ working on bidding, hence
we expect 32-34HCP,
c ) known 8card fit (which may not be good if C)
d) opener has a choice and canot expect better opposite a passed hand

Sure it may go down but how craven do you want to be?

On the bidding not clear whether 4D merely shows 5+D with extra strength or more descriptive, but I think West is craven: after all slam try with xx xx Axxxx Kxxx and this hand is much better distribution and strength (admittedly my example passes 3NT).

[mikestar]

East 100%. I would have bid 4NT directly over 3♠ and left it to partner; having saved space with 3NT and faced with strong interest from West (he would pass 3NT with mild interest), I must make up for my previous underbid. At IMPS I would try 5NT pick-a slam. If we were playing match points I would bid 6NT.

[gnasher]

I think East bid his hand impeccably. Look at all the things that are wrong with his hand:
- More than half of his high card strength is in partner's short suits
- He has a spade loser. A-AK in the majors would have been far better than KQ-AK.
- He doesn't know of an eight-card fit
- He is minimum

With the West hand I'd have been looking for a grand slam initially. I certainly wouldn't stop in game.

[whereagles]

skaeran, on Feb 10 2008, 07:59 PM, said:

Who's most to blame for this disaster?

I dunno who's to blame, but I would never bid less than a slam with West's hand after a 22-24 NT

[kfay]

If I were sitting West I'd force to slam opposite a 22-24 NT opening... I'm thinking 7 out of the box.

But I think that East carries some blame on this one. Mostly West, though.

[kenrexford]

It seems that East should be all but assured that, in this auction, the slam will probably make or break on a club hook. West almost assuredly lacks the spade Ace for this auction, it seems, and needs help in the minors, particularly slow club values. So, East either feels lucky or feels unlucky.

[Edmunte1]

I think East bid well, West should move on, 6NT with 32-33 hcp and 2 potential source tricks should have some play.

[pclayton]

West is mostly to blame, even with 10 opposite 22, slam has to be nearly there, but if pard has an offshape 2N with 5-4 in the majors, we might be high enough.

I don't like the methods. What would 4 of a major be over 3N?

I didn't know anyone played a 22-24 2N opening anymore except in books

[skjaeran]

I was west and have to take most of the blame.

There was a few 6♣ contracts around, but not at our other table - opps got to 6NT. So we lost 11 well deserved IMPs.

[kenrexford]

skaeran, on Feb 11 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

I was west and have to take most of the blame.

There was a few 6♣ contracts around, but not at our other table - opps got to 6NT. So we lost 11 well deserved IMPs.

I really don't get taking any blame for this.

East -- 2NT -- 22-24 -- good
West -- 3♠ -- minor slam try -- good
East -- 3NT -- too much wasted in majors -- good
West -- 4♦ -- very good diamonds, not so good in clubs, partner's 3NT means the shortness in the major is probably irrelevant -- good
East -- I expect something like you held, and I decided that I need the club hook and clubs cooperating, probably, so I'm out -- fair decision

This was a borderline judgment decision. I think that the auction focused the partnership on the right discussion and right features, with a decision being made that was a sound decision. As it turns out, it appears that the stiff heart Queen carries a lot of weight and that the slam makes.

The only legitimate way to approach closer to a good decision, IMO, would be for East to let West know that he is thinking about it. If Opener cannot ask, then it would make sense for East to be able to use "flag last train" bids. In other words, Opener could bid 4♥ to say, "I am inclined to sign off but view 6♣ as maybe right" and 4♠ the same thing about diamonds. Last train, flagging the focus. In that event, Opener might flag 4♥. But, it seems that you want to refocus diamonds. Or, maybe Opener flags diamonds, hoping that his majors might produce slow loser pitches in clubs and hoping that 4♦ was a real good suit cue, as expected. That's a little tough, but the technique might help.

[gnasher]

pclayton, on Feb 11 2008, 09:57 PM, said:

I didn't know anyone played a 22-24 2N opening anymore except in books

If the partnership has a better way to show hands in the 20-21 range, I think that's a Good Thing. Auctions after a 2NT opening are often hopelessly imprecise - this one being a good example - so there is merit is making them as rare as possible.