No Trump over a Minor II


J 5
Q 9 7
A Q 9 7 4
A K 4
Q 10 4
A K 5
J 10 8 6 3
6 5

Here the dominant suit is a balanced fit and the spade stopper is again skimpy. But again, the hand will play better in no trump than in that minor suit. If the diamond hook is on, the no trump bidder can romp home with an overtrick or two.
But if the diamond hook is off? Then you may be set in three no, but you would surely be set in 5 diamonds. "Yes," the unconvinced reader might argue, "but in five diamonds, I have protection against being set badly, while in 3 spades, if they get off to a spade opening lead, I'll be wide open in that suit." Well, yes. . . and no.

If the suit was originally divided 4-4, you'll actually make your contract which you couldn't do in diamonds. If 5-3, then they'll presumably be able to run 4 spades if they play their cards well, but that's only down one, the same number you'd be down in a diamond contract! If 6-2, yes, it would seem they might set you one more than in diamonds, but that's provided either East has the length, or they ducked an opening spade lead, which indeed wouldn't work if East has one of the top honors in the short suit. Are you getting the picture?
You're not really in such a more parlous situation in no trump unless East has seven spades, his partner didn't have a stiff honor, found the killing singleton lead and of course, East has to have the diamond king. I'll take my chances on no trump here. Nothing is going to help me in five diamonds if the diamond hook is off. The defense will surely find its way to two spade winners, regardless of the opening lead. In no trump, it has to be an opening spade lead and a losing diamond hook to hurt me, and even then I have these chances of making my contract: spades are 4-4; West has 5 on a 5-3 split, and they carelessly forgot to lose a spade early. East now has no more. Or East has a doubleton honor on a 6-2 split. Nothing will help the defense with that holding.

This hand surfaced on OKbridge.
A 8 4
A Q 7 3
A K 5
9 6 2
9 7 3 K J 6 5
K 9 8 4 J 6 5 2
Q 6 10
K J 10 5 Q 8 4 3
Q 10 2
10
J 9 8 7 4 3 2
A 7

This hand is pleasantly ambiguous with regard to no trump vs. minor. Six diamonds is cold here. Still, you need two kings favorably placed, plus the 2-1 diamond split for this to be true, while three no offers 10 top tricks regardless of the major suit kings (though it most definitely needs the 2-1 diamonds also). Which would you rather be in?
Well, I certainly wouldn't be ashamed of being in no trump here, though we missed a slam. There are a lot of hands where you can go back and note that a better contract was available if only . . . if only . . . But it does you no good to moon over missed opportunities unless the point is that someone has violated an elementary principle of bidding. Since anyone's going to be in trouble if diamonds aren't 2-1, I'll omit that 3-0 possibility from the discussion. Needing each of two kings to be favorably placed gives you a 25% possibility for slam. Let's see what happens to those who bid slam 4 times and those who bid game four times. The people who bid slam pickup 1370 points vulnerable, but lose 300 going down one three times, for 1070 points total. The people who bid a no trump game four times pick up 630 each time for 2520 points. 'Nuff said?

This bidding sequence comes from a computer, and I know there are those who'll say, "Oh, well, a computer." Still, there aren't many stupidities committed by the computer that aren't matched by live people, and anyway, I think the hand has a lesson, whatever the provenance. It demonstrates that no trump isn't always to be preferred over a minor, particularly when you have a superfit, and that it would be wise for partners to communicate this knowledge and then to determine whether they still like no trump. And I would say the predominant factor in such a decision would be your distribution. Singletons, even stiff aces, should make you very wary of no trump in the face of a super minor suit fit.
A 8
9
J 7 6 3 2
A Q 8 6 2
Q 10 6 5 2 K J
A J 8 2 10 7 5 4 3
K Q 9 5 10 8 4
------ 9 4 3
9 7 4 3 South West North East
K Q 6 1 Dbl Redbl 1
A 2 NT Pass 3 Pass
K J 10 7 5 3 NT All Pass

Here's how to miss a laydown minor suit game for a 3 no contract which you can't make. Whoa! Why three diamonds? North has two five card suits, one headed by the A Q, one headed by the jack and spots, one bid by his partner, the other not. I will grant that this is such a ridiculous bid that you wouldn't find it common in a large tournament. Still, I've seen 'em just as ridiculous. North also has a singleton, and in view of that, he ought to give one warning to his partner that his hand isn't altogether suited to no trump.
Now at this point North doesn't know about the superfit. His partner could easily have bid a 3-card suit on his opening bid, at which point South can take his partner's warning into account, and still think no trump would serve their interests better. But South is looking at a 5-card suit and a singleton of his own, albeit the ace. And he can figure that unless his partner's points are largely in diamonds, he's going to get diamond ruffs in the closed hand, and yes, enough to make up for the extra two tricks contracted for.
Well, you can always throw out that old "hindsight is better than foresight" if you like. But I have said elsewhere, if you're looking at singletons, particularly in the face of a good fit, you'll probably do better in the minor than in no trump. And so it behooves you to inform your partner of your holding insofar as possible. You can't say, partner I have a singleton here. But in showing a club fit over your partner's no trump bid, you can say (substantially), partner we've got a good fit here and I think the trump contract might serve us better.