[WrecksVee]

OK, WrecksVee weighs in. Re the superaccept, I have already upgraded my hand 20 HCP for its excess of aces and kings to open a 21-22 NT. I chose not to superaccept as given the HCP range I did not think 5.5 cover cards that out of line and I expected to be cue bidding over 3NT. In retrospect I should have superaccepted. But it never occured to me that the reason to superaccept was that it would be my last chance to play 4♠.

Re cue bidding and not superaccepting, this hand with values in all suits and excess controls should superaccept. It was a lazy bid by me not to do so. But not all good hands with four card support are best shown by superaccepting. Change the ♣AK to the ♦K and ♥K plus some J and I make the same upgrade to open 2NT 21-22. But then cue bidding seems better. On this layout over a 3NT rebid a 4♦ cue gives partner the knowledge that no ♣A or K is wasted opposite the void or at least highlights the lack of ♣ control. Even if the ♣QJ are wasted in the 2NT opener, that is still 18+5=23 out of 30 working HCP from Responder's POV, so 6♠ would be worth a shot even if it is only a 5-3 fit.

When partner shows 6+ spades and slam interest I "know" I have the right hand. Sadly mistaken; as 4NT is down we lost a game swing on the first board of a 10 board match and are unable to recover.

I think the best comments here were those who suggested bidding a Texas transfer to sign off. As Jay felt that was where the hand belonged, then Texas gets to the desired spot without promising extras. But neither of us thought of that in the follow up discussion.

[kenrexford]

gnasher, on Jun 24 2008, 02:40 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Jun 24 2008, 02:45 AM, said:

Whereas a transfer and then a jump to game is a slam try encouraging further action after a 1NT auction, the appropriateness of more aggressive super-accepting after a 2NT opening suggests to me that Opener cannot have an acceptance of the slam try but not a superacceptance of the transfer.  His chance to accept a slak try came and passed.

Are you saying that opener can't ever have a move after 2NT-3♥; 3♠-4♠, or are you talking only about hands where he has primary spade support?

Yes, IMO. Opener should super-accept with hands that would move. With tweener hands, he does not hang partner who might have a hand like this, where a well-placed superaccept might make it interesting but where even the four-level might be unsafe with the wrong "almost super-accept" hand.

Perhaps inconsistently, I think that Opener can "super-accept," in a sense, after 2NT-transfer-nonsuper-3NT, but the super-accept in that auction should be more about a potential trick source than pure cover card. Of course, this begs the question of why no super-accept because of the trick source, and why no movement over transfer...4M because of the trick source. But, my opinion is based on avoiding the five-level when it is unsafe but a willingness to seek that unlikely, perfect fit slam if I can do so below 4M.

[kenrexford]

I just re-thought this through and have an idea.

Most 2NT super-accepts feature something that looks like 6 covers. The six covers seem to group together for utility into either some sort of 2-1-2-1, where the key is if the side 2 hits a critical second suit for Responder, or 1-2-2-1, where two suits could do this, or possibly a 2-2-2-0, where the 0 might fit shortness.

My usual technique has Opener cue the first 2 that he reaches (first suit with two of the top three honors). 3NT can show the 5♥/2♠ holding after the transfer to spades; after a transfer to hearts the one-under cue (diamonds) to save the re-transfer.

If neither of these is your cup of tea, then another approach might make sense.

After a transfer to spades, 4♣, 4♦, and 4♠ show supers with clubs, diamonds, and hearts two top honors. 3NT shows a 2-2-2-0 combination (undisclosed empathetic splinter) and invites a splinter bid if Responder has one (or, alternatively, 4♣ could ask the location of the 0 suit). Over hearts, 3NT shows a spade cue, 3♠ the 2-2-2-0, and 3NT asking for the stiff over 3♠ or showing the stiff spade depending on preference).

The one-under could then show something else, whatever makes sense. Perhaps the min/max of the stiff in the one-under suit (one-under is a full six, 4M is one-under with questionable 6, to solve the no LTTC problem).

I like this, except for the loss of the 5♥/2♠ bid. But, maybe this is better.

[gnasher]

kenrexford, on Jun 24 2008, 01:20 PM, said:

gnasher, on Jun 24 2008, 02:40 AM, said:

Are you saying that opener can't ever have a move after 2NT-3♥; 3♠-4♠, or are you talking only about hands where he has primary spade support?

Yes, IMO. Opener should super-accept with hands that would move. With tweener hands, he does not hang partner who might have a hand like this

What would opener do over 3♥ with a slam-suitable hand containing a doubleton spade, such as Ax AQx Axx AK109x?

[kenrexford]

gnasher, on Jun 24 2008, 08:13 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Jun 24 2008, 01:20 PM, said:

gnasher, on Jun 24 2008, 02:40 AM, said:

Are you saying that opener can't ever have a move after 2NT-3♥; 3♠-4♠, or are you talking only about hands where he has primary spade support?

Yes, IMO. Opener should super-accept with hands that would move. With tweener hands, he does not hang partner who might have a hand like this

What would opener do over 3♥ with a slam-suitable hand containing a doubleton spade, such as Ax AQx Axx AK109x?

That precise hand is way too strong to open 2NT, for starters. That's almost a Kokish hand.

Lighten it up, though, to ♠Ax ♥AQx ♦Axxx ♣AK109. Nope -- that's still too good by my calculations.

Um...

♠Kx ♥AQx ♦Axxx ♣AKxx?

That works. Better yet is

♠Qx ♥AKx ♦Axxx ♣AKxx

That's a real toughie. I think I'd hang partner and apologize later, to be honest.

[gnasher]

kenrexford, on Jun 25 2008, 01:47 AM, said:

♠Qx ♥AKx ♦Axxx ♣AKxx

That's a real toughie. I think I'd hang partner and apologize later, to be honest.

An alternative would be to play 2NT-3♥-3♠-4♠ the same way as everyone else has said that they play it. It seems to me that being able to find a slam with a perfectly-fitting combined 25-count is less valuable than allowing responder to show a one-suited slam try without going past game. That would also be more consistent with your stated desire to avoid the five-level when it is unsafe.

You can, in fact, do better by playing 2NT-4m as a transfer to the linked major, showing a one-suited slam try. Signoffs in 4M go via the three-level transfer. Now with a hand that has slam interest only opposite a superaccept, but wants to play in the major opposite a non-superaccept, you can start with a three-level transfer without overstating your hand. Opposite the 1-suited slam try, opener has room to show or deny interest below the game level.

This has the further advantage, apparently valuable to some players, that with a weakish 5-5 you don't have to plan two rounds of the auction before responding to 2NT - you can transfer to the major and then decide what game you want to play in.

[kenrexford]

gnasher, on Jun 25 2008, 02:53 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Jun 25 2008, 01:47 AM, said:

♠Qx ♥AKx ♦Axxx ♣AKxx

That's a real toughie.  I think I'd hang partner and apologize later, to be honest.

An alternative would be to play 2NT-3♥-3♠-4♠ the same way as everyone else has said that they play it. It seems to me that being able to find a slam with a perfectly-fitting combined 25-count is less valuable than allowing responder to show a one-suited slam try without going past game. That would also be more consistent with your stated desire to avoid the five-level when it is unsafe.

You can, in fact, do better by playing 2NT-4m as a transfer to the linked major, showing a one-suited slam try. Signoffs in 4M go via the three-level transfer. Now with a hand that has slam interest only opposite a superaccept, but wants to play in the major opposite a non-superaccept, you can start with a three-level transfer without overstating your hand. Opposite the 1-suited slam try, opener has room to show or deny interest below the game level.

This has the further advantage, apparently valuable to some players, that with a weakish 5-5 you don't have to plan two rounds of the auction before responding to 2NT - you can transfer to the major and then decide what game you want to play in.

I was thinking that same thing, that over 2NT perhaps Texas should be the stronger action. Interesting.

[han]

We don't play Texas. If opener doesn't superaccept over the transfer then responder can bid 4S to play or 4H with slam interest. With both majors we bid differently.

This is quite in line with Ken's thinking (that responder should be able to sign off unless opener superaccepts) so I thought I'd mention it.