[Statto]

twoshy, on 2012-June-05, 18:52, said:

It is much harder to construct hands with ♦Kx than those with ♦KQJx(x), for instance.

Might partner choose to play in 4♦X with ♦KQJxx?

[Codo]

Or might he continue with another bid instead of 4♥, now that he knows that we have the club control?

And might Frances had written: Partner had shown second round control in diamonds if a singleton diamond would be possible?

[PetteriLem]

I think partner has a strong balanced hand, because he did not splinter or show a side suit initially. The methods used leave open the question is my assumption valid. If partner really has a strong balanced hand, I should co-operate, because I have a control rich hand. Could partner have something like this Axx, AJxx, AQxx, Qx. I think it should be minimum, because bal vs bal hands need lots high cards to make 12 tricks. If I stay passive partner might think we have 2 club losers on the spot. As many people have suggested pass should show a club control. That is why I pass also, but definately without the double I would bid 4♠. I would really like to continue with 4♠ on my next turn, but I probably showed my hand with the pass already. I pass again, if partner bids 4♥, but bid 4♠, if redouble comes back. The slam is so close that If either of us blinks, we are going to land on 6♥ and make it with ease.

[cherdano]

PetteriLem, on 2012-June-06, 01:59, said:

Could partner have something like this Axx, AJxx, AQxx, Qx.

I agree he could have something like this (maybe I would add a hcp here or there). Indeed, as Andy pointed out, this is the type of hand where we do no longer want to play 6♥ with the ♦K likely off-side.

[Fluffy]

jallerton, on 2012-June-05, 12:24, said:

However, partner has made a slam try opposite 13-14 balanced, despite lacking ♠KJ ♥KQ ♦A and ♣AK. Try writing down some possible hands for partner.

Unable to construct hands, this is the point where I would start wondering how likelly it is that partner forgot that 3NT is just 13-14

[gordontd]

phil_20686, on 2012-June-05, 12:33, said:

I dont think it's obvious that partner doesn't have the club K. He may instead have a slam try that wants to go past 4Hearts only if you have the club ace. Might partner not bid this way with: AQx Axxx x KQxxx?

Not according to the information provided in the original post. And I can't imagine that such a hand would have started the auction in this way, not knowing that you would end up at this point.

[phil_20686]

gordontd, on 2012-June-06, 04:04, said:

Not according to the information provided in the original post. And I can't imagine that such a hand would have started the auction in this way, not knowing that you would end up at this point.

Yes, but the hands that be can have that would make sense are obviously also impossible: x Axxx AKQJxx xx? I mean surely you are not starting with 2S on this hand?

If partner is balanced, the hands that give slam any play are basically a drive, given he is short KS KQh AKc. be must have Kxx Axxx AKQx Qxx or similar, and it isnt like he will stop with those hands anyway.

[JLOGIC]

I really don't understand anything but pass then pass. We have minimum HCP in an already tight range. We have shown slam interest/a club control in that context. Our partner has cuebid our 2 small, it got doubled on our right, and partner has signed off. We are certain to be getting that lead. Partner does not have the king of our Axx. What exactly are we doing?

[gordontd]

mgoetze, on 2012-June-05, 04:19, said:

This must be a UI case because it looks like a completely noninteresting pass-and-pass to me.

You worked it out Michael . (If any admin now wishes to move it to another forum, by all means do so).

I thought if I posted it here I would get a truer group of responses, and would encourage posters to think a bit deeper about it.

What happened at the table was that the partner of this hand alerted 3NT and explained it (incorrectly) as demanding a cue-bid. This hand signed off in 4♥ and I was asked for a ruling. After discussing it with a few of my colleagues and finding out more about their system, I disallowed the 4♥ bid but allowed him to pass his partner's rebid of 4♥ - ie I ruled that bidding on over 4♥ was not a logical alternative.

This was accepted at the time by their opponents, though one of them was less happy about it than the other, and he came to me later to tell me that two members of the L&E committee who he had consulted had both said they would not have allowed him to pass 4♥, and might have further penalised him for bidding 4♥.

I think in retrospect that I might have given him a penalty for making the 4♥ bid, though that has so far not been our practice in the EBU (but may well become so in the light of recent work Frances has done for the L&E committee). However I don't think it's clear from the responses in this thread (making my own assessment of who are peers of the player in question) that I was wrong to adjust on the basis of allowing him to Pass his partner's 4♥ bid. It may be closer than I thought at the time though.

[jallerton]

Fluffy, on 2012-June-06, 03:02, said:

Unable to construct hands, this is the point where I would start wondering how likelly it is that partner forgot that 3NT is just 13-14

Well it turns out that you were right, but before we saw Gordon's explanation, there were other possibilities.

Maybe partner knew that 3NT showed 13-14, but was under the impression that a 4♣ continuation by her would have been RKCB or even a doubleton enquiry. In that case her actual 4♦ bid might just be "last train" or, even if just a cue bid in diamonds, the inference about the lack of club control opposite would no longer be valid.

As for constructing hands opposite consistent with the auction, I started by giving partner the missing honours.

If she has something like:

♠AQx ♥AJxx ♦KQx ♣Qxx

she shouldn't be making a slam try opposite 13-14 balanced as we can't realy have enough to make slam good.

So she has to be more distributional than that.

If we give partner the right distribution slam could be good, e.g.:

♠AQxxx ♥AJxx ♦KQ ♣Qx; or

♠AQ ♥ Axxxx ♦KQxx ♣xx

but then with a slightly less well fitting hand slam could have little or no play.

Will the 5-level will be safe? Probably.
Will bidding 4♠ get to slam when it is making but still allow us to stop in 5♥ when slam is poor? Maybe.
So is it right to bid on over 4♥? Maybe.

Now Gordon tells us we have UI. That suggests passing 4♥. So with the UI, I'm bidding 4♠.

[MrAce]

mgoetze, on 2012-June-05, 06:18, said:

Isn't it kind of sad to not be able to find out whether partner's control is first or second round?

Not really, unless you want to take control of the auction after limiting your hand with 13-14 balanced. Showing him what u got will be for your benefit imo.

[han]

I can't imagine bidding on over 4H. We have just a normal hand for 3NT, not that special, we have cooperated and shown a club control, why do we need to bid more?

Having said that, somebody who bids 4H immediately is going out of his way to use the authorized information. It would be nice if something could be done about this kind of behavior.

[Codo]

I do not like to give pps, but I would like to give one for for the direct 4 ♥ bid if possible.

[Fluffy]

gordontd, on 2012-June-06, 14:45, said:

I thought if I posted it here I would get a truer group of responses, and would encourage posters to think a bit deeper about it.

Posting with an account without "td" on its name who doesn't post 90% on law forums would also help.

[gordontd]

Fluffy, on 2012-June-07, 05:33, said:

Posting with an account without "td" on its name who doesn't post 90% on law forums would also help.

[kayin801]

I'm getting confused here: does XX say anything about clubs besides the fact we have a control in it, or does it say something about diamonds as well, or...? It's not clear but is it likely that we have anything in diamonds ever on this auction, therefore pass or XX just talks about clubs (2nd/1st?). Sorry, I'm just having trouble following the conversation (I'm also super jetlagged so that doesn't help)

[gnasher]

kayin801, on 2012-June-07, 06:41, said:

I'm getting confused here: does XX say anything about clubs besides the fact we have a control in it, or does it say something about diamonds as well, or...? It's not clear but is it likely that we have anything in diamonds ever on this auction, therefore pass or XX just talks about clubs (2nd/1st?). Sorry, I'm just having trouble following the conversation (I'm also super jetlagged so that doesn't help)

I think the default meanings are:
- Redouble by us shows first-round diamond control *and* club control.
- Pass by us shows club control.
- Redouble by partner shows first-round diamond control.

It's certainly possible to have a top diamond in this sequence. They may have doubled 4♦ on a suit headed by the queen, or they may have psyched the double, or partner may have cue-bid a singleton.