[Winstonm]

This hand reminds me of one supposedly played by Belladonna and described by Jose Le Dentu in Championship Bridge. According to the account, Belladonna bid the grand slam vulnerable against non-vulnerable knowing his side was off an ace and also sure that the other side had to take out the insurance and bid once more.

At the time it was quite a coup, but probably old hat these days.

[Lovera]

Winstonm, on 2021-August-11, 11:47, said:

This hand reminds me of one supposedly played by Belladonna and described by Jose Le Dentu in Championship Bridge. According to the account, Belladonna bid the grand slam vulnerable against non-vulnerable knowing his side was off an ace and also sure that the other side had to take out the insurance and bid once more.

At the time it was quite a coup, but probably old hat these days.

In W was Priday who played against a grand slam bidded by the young Italians who replaced the rested Blue Team on that occasion and who had preferred to make a more prudent and neutral opening lead in trump. The bidding was very dynamic: W 3 ♣ N X E p S 4 ♠, p 5 ♣ p 7 ♠ and Priday had: ♠ J ♥ K9 ♦ 843 ♣ AJ108653 At that time Cremoncini made the contract with a squeeze.(Bridge A' La Une pagg. 235-237)The final situation was that Priday was squeezed in ♥ and ♣ on the last trump: North ♥ A7 ♣ K West ♥ K9 ♣ A South ♠ 9 ♥ Q8

[Lovera]

mw64ahw, on 2021-August-10, 06:37, said:

Possible although I guess it would depend how aggressive your opponents are especially opposite a strong only 2♣. With a singleton K/Q my hcp would need to be 1/2 higher so you end up only missing a Queen or Jack.
With the hands as they are 6♣ has ~97% probability and tweaking the hands, you still have over 50% for the small slam so in the long term 6♣ remains optimal. 7♣ is ~50%
My software bids it / unlikely that my partner would

It has to remember that is not good to bid a grand with 50% of probabilities.(Lovera)

[Cascade]

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-August-09, 15:48, said:

And how will you likely bid this hand?

First a question: What did the double of 2♠ show?

Second: If my partner opens a strong 2♣ and I have 8 hcp then I am going to bid a slam unless something bad happens like no fit or we discover we are missing two aces or no control in a side suit or if opener is balanced we just do not have enough strength. In any event I am going to invite a slam.

Here partner showed something extra, perhaps only in terms of distribution, by bidding 5♣ so I am raising to 6♣. I can infer short spades and slam will be playable opposite ♠x ♥Kxx ♦AQx ♣AKQJxx and that is only 19 hcp so I expect partner to be better than that. Also, north has 8 decent points here including an ace and a king.

Third: I might open 1♣ with this hand. Then whether it is biddable might depend on how the auction goes but I suspect if north shows some values then it will be hard to stop south after they find a fit in either hearts or clubs.

[mikl_plkcc]

Cascade, on 2021-August-27, 18:29, said:

First a question: What did the double of 2♠ show?

Second: If my partner opens a strong 2♣ and I have 8 hcp then I am going to bid a slam unless something bad happens like no fit or we discover we are missing two aces or no control in a side suit or if opener is balanced we just do not have enough strength. In any event I am going to invite a slam.

Here partner showed something extra, perhaps only in terms of distribution, by bidding 5♣ so I am raising to 6♣. I can infer short spades and slam will be playable opposite ♠x ♥Kxx ♦AQx ♣AKQJxx and that is only 19 hcp so I expect partner to be better than that. Also, north has 8 decent points here including an ace and a king.

Third: I might open 1♣ with this hand. Then whether it is biddable might depend on how the auction goes but I suspect if north shows some values then it will be hard to stop south after they find a fit in either hearts or clubs.

We didn't have an agreement of the X for this particular situation so I treated it as a takeout double to GF me and choose any suit other than ♠.

If I open 1♣ with this hand, will there be a risk of everyone passes that I will miss game? This hand contains 9 tricks by itself already which is already 2♣ worthwhile.

[smerriman]

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-August-29, 12:38, said:

If I open 1♣ with this hand, will there be a risk of everyone passes that I will miss game? This hand contains 9 tricks by itself already which is already 2♣ worthwhile.

With 13 spades (and 10 hearts) to be spread amongst the other three players, it's incredibly unlikely it will be passed out even if partner can't respond to 1♣. And if it is, game doesn't look certain yet with no entries to take a diamond finesse and some help needed in hearts..

[Winstonm]

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-August-29, 12:38, said:

We didn't have an agreement of the X for this particular situation so I treated it as a takeout double to GF me and choose any suit other than ♠.

If I open 1♣ with this hand, will there be a risk of everyone passes that I will miss game? This hand contains 9 tricks by itself already which is already 2♣ worthwhile.

There is a slight risk to a 1 club opening but there is also a risk of getting too high with a 2c opening. These in-between hands prompted the idea of using 1C as an artificial forcing opening.

[Cascade]

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-August-29, 12:38, said:

We didn't have an agreement of the X for this particular situation so I treated it as a takeout double to GF me and choose any suit other than ♠.

I think you need to agree what a double means over interference over your 2♣ opening. These are typically important hands and if your partnership does not know what the cheapest non-pass means when they overcall you will often end up guessing.

Quote

If I open 1♣ with this hand, will there be a risk of everyone passes that I will miss game? This hand contains 9 tricks by itself already which is already 2♣ worthwhile.

This will happen almost never. The hand has 19 hcp. That leaves 21 hcp for the other three hands. If partner passes that shows five or fewer hcp. I expect my partners to often respond with 5. That means that the opponents will have 16 or more hcp. If either of them has 8+ hcp and a five-card suit then we would expect them to bid. There are other hands in which they will bid.

[cherdano]

Cascade, on 2021-August-27, 18:29, said:

First a question: What did the double of 2♠ show?

Second: If my partner opens a strong 2♣ and I have 8 hcp then I am going to bid a slam unless something bad happens like no fit or we discover we are missing two aces or no control in a side suit or if opener is balanced we just do not have enough strength. In any event I am going to invite a slam.

Here partner showed something extra, perhaps only in terms of distribution, by bidding 5♣ so I am raising to 6♣. I can infer short spades and slam will be playable opposite ♠x ♥Kxx ♦AQx ♣AKQJxx and that is only 19 hcp so I expect partner to be better than that. Also, north has 8 decent points here including an ace and a king.

Third: I might open 1♣ with this hand. Then whether it is biddable might depend on how the auction goes but I suspect if north shows some values then it will be hard to stop south after they find a fit in either hearts or clubs.

Since I can't upvote yellows let me quote and say I agree with every word.
"What did double show?" should have been the first comment in this thread, not the 24th.

Double as game-forcing takeout is a fine agreement after 2♣. I think South would be close to 6♣ in that case.

[smerriman]

cherdano, on 2021-August-31, 18:20, said:

"What did double show?" should have been the first comment in this thread, not the 24th.

Well, it was specified in the 3rd reply, so there wasn't much point asking after that

[nige1]

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-August-09, 16:31, said:

I only treat the X here as a game-forcing bid which asks me to choose a suit.

Cascade, on 2021-August-27, 18:29, said:

... If my partner opens a strong 2♣ and I have 8 hcp then I am going to bid a slam unless something bad happens like no fit or we discover we are missing two aces or no control in a side suit or if opener is balanced we just do not have enough strength. In any event I am going to invite a slam.
Here partner showed something extra, perhaps only in terms of distribution, by bidding 5♣ so I am raising to 6♣. I can infer short spades and slam will be playable opposite ♠x ♥Kxx ♦AQx ♣AKQJxx and that is only 19 hcp so I expect partner to be better than that. Also, north has 8 decent points here including an ace and a king.
... I might open 1♣ with this hand. Then whether it is biddable might depend on how the auction goes but I suspect if north shows some values then it will be hard to stop south after they find a fit in either hearts or clubs.

mikl_plkcc's deal
+++++++++++++++++++
From North's point of view, 6♣ is attractive because South is likely to be short in ♠s but the partnership are at the mercy If undisciplined opponents, who cunningly ignore the law of total tricks, perhaps overcalling 2♠ with a 4 card suit e.g. ♠ A K J T ♥ x ♦ x x x x x x ♣ x x.
Most agree with Cascade and co. With the South hand. it's close between opening 1♣ or 2♣. If the latter, then you should easily reach a slam. it's still near impossible to construct a 2♣ opener for South, that doesn't make slam a reasonable bet.

---