[hrothgar]

Suppose that your partnership believes that you have values for game

You are sitting on a six or seven card major
You know that partner has a singleton or void in your suit
(and odds are, they have a long suit of their own)

Odds are you have misfitting 6-3-3-1s or some such

You need to choose between 3N and 4M

What would drive you to one versus the other?
Slow tricks versus fast or suit quality or ???

[DavidKok]

This is a difficult question in general. I would personally approach it as follows:

In 3NT you need only 9 tricks, versus 10 in 4M. Normally if you bid to 4M the major suit fit will produce an extra trick in the form of a ruff, but with such a misfit (6-1 or 7-0) this is not very likely. All other things being equal, this argues in favour of no trump. However, I would take into consideration:

In favour of 4M over 3NT:

• If one (or more) of the 3-card side suits a weak, there is a risk opponents can take 4-5 quick tricks there in notrump. This way trump might still produce an `extra trick', simply by ruffing the opponents' long suit.
  
• If the points are very unbalanced between you and your partner, it is hard to gain entry to the weak hand in 3NT. This argues for playing in the major suit of the weaker hand.
  
• If you and your partner don't have points to spare (say, you're looking at a likely combined 24-count) you might need some ruffing swindle to bring in the contract.
  
• If your long suit is not solid you need to lose the lead multiple times to set it up in 3NT, whereas you can ruff it free in 4M.

In favour of 3NT over 4M:

• If your side suits are solid there is no suit the opponents can attack safely in 3NT (and they might be thrown in or be stuck developing your long suit very early in the play). Furthermore, if your side suits are strong your long suit is probably weak, and you can lose control of the hand in 4M on a bad trump break.
  
• If your side has more than sufficient strength (let's say around 28 points combined) 3NT is a lot safer than 4M, because the main threat the weak opponents have is ruffing your high cards.
  
• If your tricks are 'quick tricks' they will produce the exact same number in 3NT and 4M, so you might as well stick with the contract that requires fewer tricks. But beware the point of communication with the weak hand - if you hold all the aces and kings partner is often hard to reach.

I'll also add that I end up playing 3NT in the 6-2 or even 7-2 fit in a major relatively often (as long as some of the latter conditions are met), and this often ends up being a superior contract.

[hrothgar]

DavidKok, on 2020-June-27, 15:35, said:

This is a difficult question in general. I would personally approach it as follows:

thanks

[pilowsky]

On a philosophical level, if you are playing in a minor, the trump suit provides additional stoppers and transportation: that's why voids and singletons are so valuable. This gift is also why you have to pay a higher price in the additional number of tricks that you must take to make a contract. In no trumps, you are unburdened by feelings of empathy, warmth or respect for others. The landscape is cold and unforgiving. You have no additional stoppers to rush to. No safe haven. The stakes are higher, You better make before they make you. which is why the reward is greater and the number of tricks needed for a contract smaller. I think that this stands, metonymically speaking, for the absence of trump stoppers.

As a new player with a childish Bridge mentality no trumps sort of appeals to me. I suppose as I grow to understand the nuances of trump control and crafty gadgets better, then suit contracts and even part scores will become more appealing. Perhaps that is what is meant by "Judgement in Bridge"