[straube]

Is the hand good enough to force game?
.....If yes, then will we gain more or less by learning partner's distribution and sharing it with the opponents? The OP says 1S-3N will be the usual contract and nothing about implying spade tolerance; perhaps it just shows conviction that 3N will be a good contract and that responder is not interested in shortness, etc.
.....If no, then might we find a better spot by a game forcing relay vs burying fits with 2N?

I think most here vote "no". It's not good enough to force game. But should it?

The answer to the "no" question is possibly "yes" in that this hand is "working" opposite any shortness partner might have. 2N would be more attractive with say xx KJx KQxx Kxxx.

But I imagine that the OP has some methodology over 1S-2N to find better contracts. Something like...

3C-forces 3D
.....3D-forced
..........P-weak diamonds
..........3H-weak 5H
..........3S-weak 6S
..........3N-good 5C
3D-GF checkback
.....3H-4H
.........3S-6S
.....3S-2S
3H-GF 5 hearts
3S-GF 5 diamonds
3N-other

It would be nice to fit in some 5431s as well but space is tight.

[jogs]

There's needs to be a fourth option on the poll. How often does one partner know enough to take control of the auction? Asking bids and relays bids sound convincing when advocated by an expert writer. In reality the right conditions seldom occur.
After partner opens 1♠ with 15 max, responder with 10-14 just isn't in position to dictate the direction of the auction. 1♠ by opener. With 2=3=4=4, responder doesn't know if there is a eight card fit. Without a eight card fit it may be difficult to make nine tricks with 26 HCPs. 7775 and 7766 partnership patterns are not conducive to generating tricks. These patterns suggest finding the best strain or any seven card fit. Stopping on the two level would probably be better for optimal expected imps than searching for an unlikely game. Therefore I hate your 2NT treatment, with those hands we should be searching for the best fit on the two level.

[steve2005]

whereagles, on 2014-May-19, 14:17, said:

2NT seems fair. Pard is going to accept this on any 13 and pass on 11-12, so there.

Exactly while you have a nice 12, if partner has 11 your not gonna have much hope of game, but partner will bid 3N with 13 at imps.
Also a 3N might just get doubled if its going down 2.

[benlessard]

If partner pass 2Nt are the losses of the miss game going to be higher than the gain of the the hands where only 8 tricks was available ? I don't think so.

I believe in Invite sound accept agressive so I don't see why I would I force to game if I can Inv and let partner take the last decision he also know we are vul at imps after all.

.

[beatrix45]

Ask me no questions, I tell you no lies. Unless partner is a notorious light opener, I bid 3NT. My reasoning is that my 12 HCP all look useful, and they offer lots of secondary values useful in a 3NT contract. Make it as hard on the opponents as possible.

[rhm]

Kit Woolsey would certainly not bid 2NT arguing that reaching the right strain is more important than making fine distinctions of your strength, thereby robbing you of the room to find out the right strain.
That partner could be minimum and game might have little play does not bother him and it is not so rare that such games make anyway.
In my opinion this hand is not suitable for an immediate 3NT with mainly first round controls outside of spades.
If partner has something like ♠AKxxx ♥Qx ♦KQxxx ♣x I am rather in 6♦ than in 3NT.
A hand lacking aces is usually suitable for an immediate 3NT, since such hands tend to be a disappointment in high level suit contracts.
Accordingly I am not convinced partner can and should correct an immediate 3NT to 4♠ just because he has six of them.

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

Does Kit ever bid 1M-3NT then? Perhaps he plays it as some sort of raise eheh

[Fluffy]

Fluffy, on 2014-May-19, 02:04, said:

1♠-2NT
2♦-2♥ (minimum with a minor, at most 5 spades)
2♠-2NT (exactly 4 clubs)
3♥-?? (exactly 5314)

Only Andy cared to answer what he would bid once you find partner is 5314

[rhm]

Fluffy, on 2014-May-19, 02:04, said:

You can exit the relays when you want to jump to game.

1♠-2NT
2♦-2♥ (minimum with a minor, at most 5 spades)
2♠-2NT (exactly 4 clubs)
3♥-?? (exactly 5314)

What game would you bid?, at which point?

Fluffy, on 2014-June-10, 14:51, said:

Only Andy cared to answer what he would bid once you find partner is 5314

Maybe because 1♠-2NT-2♦ is an unusual sequence

gnasher, on 2014-May-19, 12:39, said:

Having started to relay, I'd go all the way. Then I'd bid 5♣, playing him for something like AJxxx Kxx x KJxx. I wouldn't expect to be right that often, though (and I don't like the methods much).

I agree I would not expect Andy to be right here often.
While I respect Andy's judgment, in this case Andy is betting to make 3 tricks more in clubs than notrumps.
I bet against.
In notrumps I likely have a diamond stop and a trick if they lead them and in about one third of the time partner's stiff will be a honor card.
If clubs do not break my chances in 5♣ will be poor.
If partners minors were reversed there would be more reason to go for the minor suit game.

I checked this with a simulation (1000 deals) with the specification exactly as given here:

Result:

3NT made double dummy on 586 delas =58.6%
Average number of tricks: 8.7

5♣ made double dummy on 340 deals = 34%
Average number of tricks 10.1

When 5♣ makes 3NT will make 88% of the time
However, when 3NT makes 5♣ will make only 51% of the time.

Single dummy I would expect the result to be even more in favor of 3NT.

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

impressive work there, Rainer

what's more, it proves bob is right.. "when in doubt, bid 3NT"