[Winstonm]

Pard and I had a disagreement over this auction - I contended that a "tight" partnership should reach it and he didn't seem to think we should because of "only 7 working high cards" and very few others would do so. However, I am of the opinion that the value of partnership is being able to outbid the opponents - not everyone gets to play with Hamman or Meckstroth.

Scoring: IMP


Our auction and the meanings playing 2/1:

1♠-2♥
2♠-2NT
3♦-3♠
4♦-4♠
P

.

---

First, the 2 spade rebid is because in our methods the hand is a little light for 3D - it does not guarantee 6 spades. The 2N created a 100% game force. 3S showed some doubt about 3N and took into consideration the likelihood of a 6 card suit. 4D at this point must show a 6/5 due to the 2S rebid and the failure to bid 3D immediately - is there another minimum range hand that can try for slam?

Here is where we disagreed. I considered the 4S bid to be either the Qx of spades or poorish diamonds so could not move. I believe with the cards in the north hand are worth the slightly unusual slam try of 5D, denying any other controls but surely showing almost this precise hand. As you can see, the 6 diamond slam depends on a 3/2 spade break without a 5/0 diamond break - making it a 66% slam. Had partner found the 5 diamond call, I would have bid the slam.

Whose side are you on?

Thanks

[helene_t]

To me 4♦ seems as denying a club control. I would suggest:
1♠-2♥
2♠*-2NT *saving bidding space, not too light for 3♦, this is a good hand!
3♦-3♠* *or 3NT notrumps
4♣*-4♦** *ace (or maybe A/K depending on your methods) **Ace or king
6♦*-pass *or first RKC if you want

[the hog]

I'm on your side Winston. I dislike hiding the D support; oh, and I like the auction up to that point.

[whereagles]

Don't think I would reach it.

1S 2H
3D 3NT
4D 5D
...?

maybe I'd add a 6th, but I doubt.

[PMetsch]

I would rebid 3♦ on the second round. This is no minimum, a 6-5 with 3 aces and a working queen. After the 2NT bid by partner I think you can play him for a 2=5=3=3 distribution, after all he didn't support spades, didn't rebid hearts and didn't bid 3 of a minor. With that info, south knows about the diamond fit and can jump to 4♦ to show a good 2-suiter (what else could it mean). Maybe then north can cuebid ♠K and slam may be reached.

[1eyedjack]

Of some interest to me is how would you get to slam when responder has

Kx
xxxxx
KJx
xxx

Because that is about all he is worth. You might even scramble home without the D:J, although I suspect it is slightly odds against in that case.

[mcphee]

A great hand and not easy to reach slam. Personally I feel this hand is good enough to bid 3D as it does contain extra values in terms of playing strenght. The secondary suit is sound.
1S 2H
3D 3N , this seems sensible at this stage, 3S also possible but tends to show 3
4D this 4D call should imply 6-5 or a very good 5-5 and now you have reached the hard part. If the responder now bid 4NT should this be key card for D or a BIG raise to 5D. 4H might be considered a last train, but this is not so easy really. I am not sure I would like it to be. My feeling is that 4N should be a big D raise as there seems to be no other sensible way to handle this hand type problem. The responders hand is tremendous in support of D and not able to really bid key card. It does not make sound logic 4NT sould be taking over as 4H or 5C would, in my mind, be a cue bid in support of D.

[Fluffy]

I would bid 3♦ second round as well, ,but even then I don't think I would reach the right spot.

[FrancesHinden]

mcphee, on Sep 4 2005, 08:41 AM, said:

A great hand and not easy to reach slam. Personally I feel this hand is good enough to bid 3D as it does contain extra values in terms of playing strenght. The secondary suit is sound.
1S 2H
3D 3N , this seems sensible at this stage, 3S also possible but tends to show 3
4D this 4D call should imply 6-5 or a very good 5-5 and now you have reached the hard part. If the responder now bid 4NT should this be key card for D or a BIG raise to 5D.

I think 4NT over 4D should be a contract suggestion.

[Winstonm]

mcphee, on Sep 4 2005, 08:41 AM, said:

A great hand and not easy to reach slam. Personally I feel this hand is good enough to bid 3D as it does contain extra values in terms of playing strenght.  The secondary suit is sound.
1S  2H
3D  3N , this seems sensible at this stage, 3S also possible but tends to show 3
4D        this 4D call should imply 6-5 or a very good 5-5 and now you have reached the hard part. If the responder now bid 4NT should this be key card for D or a BIG raise to 5D. 4H might be considered a last train, but this is not so easy really. I am not sure I would like it to be. My feeling is that 4N should be a big D raise as there seems to be no other sensible way to handle this hand type problem. The responders hand is tremendous in support of D and not able to really bid key card. It does not make sound logic 4NT sould be taking over as 4H or 5C would, in my mind, be a cue bid in support of D.

I understand the choice of bidding 3D immediately - but I felt I would be better placed to indicate 6/5 if I first rebid spades and then bid diamonds twice - I didn't want to emphasize the strength of the hand as this hand calls for some pretty precise cards before it becomes good. Once partner shows secondard spades support and an unwillingness to bid no trump the hand became more slammish.

Winston

[mikeh]

I cannot imagine not bidding 3♦ on the second round. You got lucky on your auction: had partner raised ♠ or rebid his ♥ (on a different layout, obviously), you would never had had the chance to even begin to describe your hand.

As it is, I confess that I very much doubt that I could reach 6♦ plausibly.

BTW, on your auction, given that you have denied a good hand by 2♠, expecting partner to make a forward-going move later strikes me as too much. If you want partner to move towards slams with that hand, give partner a reason: show that you hold a good hand yourself.

Let's see if I can come up with a sensible auction:

1♠ 2♥
3♦ 3N
4♦ 5♦
P


If responder bids 3N, then 4N over 4♦ is to play... it cannot be a slam try. xx AKJxx xx KQJx would be typical

1♠ 2♥
3♦ 3♠
4♦ 4N
6♦

If you play that responder's 4N is a forward-going move (and in one partnership I did play that a non-jump 4N in minor auctions was never keycard... we sometimes had auctions in which keycard was not available, but they were few, and we never seemed to have a problem getting to the right spot when they arose), then this hand qualifies. However, most partnerships seem to use 4N as keycard in these sequences, so I would not suggest this as a sensible auction for the majority of partnerships

[inquiry]

In 2/1 your auction looks some reasonable, and i don't think raising diamonds now will help, but I would prefer to rebid 3♦ over 2♥.

To 1eyejack, it is doubtful that slam can be bid, even with my favorite misiry. Because the aucton would be....

Axxxxx
x
AQTxx
A

Kx
xxxxx
KJx
xxx

Would you believe,

3D - 4H
4S - Pass/5D

What happens here is the "bump the preempt" is 4h. Which is how I think the auction should go after 3D. Over 4S there is no logical way to investigate. If parnter has 3 losers, you are great chance for 6D. If he has 4 losers, one has to be the spade queen. but the bidding is so high there is no room to investigate.

3D = heart preempt, or two suiter with D and another suit
4H = preempt
4S = 3 or 4 losers, S+D two suiter

Of course, if south clubs/hearts were reversed, or if south decided not to bump the preempt, it can be bid, and this is the way. The auction would be...

3D-3H
3S-4C
4H-4S
5C-6D
Pass

3D = same
3H = Pass/Correct
3S = S + D two suiter, exactly four loser
4C = denial cue-bid
4H = Ask if "heart control is the ACE"
4S = no
5C = I am missing the spade QUEEN, with no CLUB loser and with a singleton H
6D = slam.

Sort of funny, at first you choose to play in 5-2 or 6-2 spade fit at four level, then press on to 6D.

[luke warm]

love reading the comments re: bidding 3♦ over 2♥... 3♦ would be my bid, and it really isn't even close... i plan on 4♠ over 3NT anyway (4♦ is possible, but 4♠ should suggest 6/5).. regardless, i think it's a hard slam to reach

[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Sep 4 2005, 03:00 PM, said:

love reading the comments re: bidding 3♦ over 2♥... 3♦ would be my bid, and it really isn't even close... i plan on 4♠ over 3NT anyway (4♦ is possible, but 4♠ should suggest 6/5).. regardless, i think it's a hard slam to reach

One of the problems I'm suggesting with a 3D bid is that this hand needs quite a lot of help to be really good - suppose partner held: xx, AQJxx, Kxx, QJx. IMO, if I bid 3D partner can quite reasonable be more excited about his hand, as he will anticipate either more HCP or more consolidation in the two suits.

A 14 count that I feel is clearly worth 3D is something like AKJxx, xx, KQJxx, x. Maybe it depends on the definition you have of "good" hand. Certainly, Axxxxx, x, AQ10xx, A is a good hand - but it's the sort of good hand that needs a lot of filler cards from pard. IMO, the 3 diamond bid directly should show a hand that needs less in filler cards so pard can better evaluate cards like Qx, AJxxx, Kxx, KJx as probably working - either the club king or heart ace is of value.

This is what makes a horserace, though - differing opinions.

Winston

[Winstonm]

1eyedjack, on Sep 4 2005, 07:40 AM, said:

Of some interest to me is how would you get to slam when responder has

Kx
xxxxx
KJx
xxx

Because that is about all he is worth.  You might even scramble home without the D:J, although I suspect it is slightly odds against in that case.

Kind of doubt this would be reached - there is always something to be said about the psycholigical aspects of partner making a 2/1 - it raises expectations as there are more chances that he holds the right cards.

That said, this auction looks like:
1S-1N
2D-2S
3D*-4D
4S**-?

*I hold the very strong opinion that this bid should not be an attempt to improve the contract and should therefore have a better meaning - quite obviously then it is some sort of try - therefore responder should cooperate with all cards working.

**Seems as though the opener has shown the same hand - whether responder can visualize the magnitude of the few cards he holds is what separates the pack, maybe? But if opener were looking to play 4S only, why not simply raise to 3S and show the 6/4 or 6/5 pattern or bid 4S?

I have stated before that a rule of thumb that has worked well for me since I first read it - wish I could credit the author but I cannot remember who it was - is that if one can imagine a perfect minimum for the bidding that makes slam a virtual laydown, then the hand is worth a slam try. Note the try part. As in mild.

Here, even with this auction, opener can envisage Kx, xxxx, KJx, xxxx which is pretty close to a minimum but offers good slam potential. The trick is to impart this message to partner.

In the above auction, after the 3D "movement" bid, responder should not pass ever - his weakest move would be to return to 3S I believe. He really doesn't know what opener is after, for sure, but it doesn't hurt to show the good diamond values with 4D.

Now, after making this "mild" try, opener can bid 4S; the extremely subtle and difficult message is that opener is mildly interested in slam if responder holds just the right minimum - and the only way to figure this out is an excersie in "what did partner not bid" and why. Very difficult but possible, IMO.

I don't consider this to be "result merchanting". No bid is out of line as it would have to be to be "merchanting"; instead, it looks more to me like an extremely subtle logic exercise that requires total trust within the partnership.

Winston

[Impact]

To be honest your South hand with 3 first round controls and a 6-5 with concentrated strength in the 5 card suit is VERY strong for such an auction.

I note that you specified that it was a bit light for your partnership to bid 3D, but frankly you have made it too difficult for a responder necessarily bereft of A to visualise slam.

To be honest I like your bidding with this hand but would reverse teh meanings of the bids- I prefer to get the weaker distributional hand out of the way early, as it is precisely this sort of hand where I am willing to push past 3NT in search of slam.

I suppose it is a question of evaluation and style - but I would always want to consider this in the stronger segment but say

KQTxxx x AQJxx Kx or less would be the maximum for my minimum distributional bid.

Further, once you determine that you would always push on with this hand beyond 3NT as you did correctly in my view - it must be right to class it in the stronger category.

[mike777]

Winstonm, on Sep 4 2005, 02:28 AM, said:

Pard and I had a disagreement over this auction - I contended that a "tight" partnership should reach it and he didn't seem to think we should because of "only 7 working high cards" and very few others would do so.  However, I am of the opinion that the value of partnership is being able to outbid the opponents - not everyone gets to play with Hamman or Meckstroth. 

Scoring: IMP


Our auction and the meanings playing 2/1:

1♠-2♥
2♠-2NT
3♦-3♠
4♦-4♠
P

.

---

First, the 2 spade rebid is because in our methods the hand is a little light for 3D - it does not guarantee 6 spades.  The 2N created a 100% game force.  3S showed some doubt about 3N and took into consideration the likelihood of a 6 card suit.  4D at this point must show a 6/5 due to the 2S rebid and the failure to bid 3D immediately - is there another minimum range hand that can try for slam?

Here is where we disagreed.  I considered the 4S bid to be either the Qx of spades or poorish diamonds so could not move.  I believe with the cards in the north hand are worth the slightly unusual slam try of 5D, denying any other controls but surely showing almost this precise hand.  As you can see, the 6 diamond slam depends on a 3/2 spade break without a 5/0 diamond break - making it a 66% slam.  Had partner found the 5 diamond call, I would have bid the slam.

Whose side are you on? 

Thanks

WTP?

How much time at the table do I have? .

The first day I spent trying to decide whether to respond 2H or 1nt semi-forcing.

The next day I spent thinking of South's rebid.

I should have this hand solved soon assuming the opp are still here.

I have thought about this hand for several days and have successfully bid:
1) 3nt
2) 4s
3) 5s
4) 5d
5) 6d

Are you suggesting you and your partner disagree on the bidding on this hand?
I fail to see any problem .

edit: Day two and still thinking about my first response, heck everyone is forcing to game and I just might start with 2 nonforcing bids, not sure yet.

1s=1nt (semi-force, yes partner can pass)
2d( yes, another bid partner may pass)=2nt( invite, not ready to commit to game yet, partner may not play the hands well so let's keep the bidding low).

edit 2 I have after 2 days bid half this hand, easy so far.
1s=1nt
2d=2nt
3d=?

1s=nonforce, can be passed
1nt=semiforce, can be passed
2d=can be passed
2nt=invite, can be passed again
3d=ok finally game force, just not sure what game or how high
One needs to make all these nonforcing bids rather than game force with 2h when one plays the hands as poor as myself.

[mikeh]

mike777, on Sep 6 2005, 10:00 AM, said:

edit 2 I have after 2 days bid half this hand, easy so far.
1s=1nt
2d=2nt
3d=?

1s=nonforce, can be passed
1nt=semiforce, can be passed
2d=can be passed
2nt=invite, can be passed again
3d=ok finally game force, just not sure what game or how high
One needs to make all these nonforcing bids rather than game force with 2h when one plays the hands as poor as myself.

Since when is 3♦ gf? It is a cry of desperation: a plea to be let out in 3♦.

It shows a hand too shapely to play even 2NT and too weak to accept a game try.

Now, it is possible, and perhaps desirable, to play transfers by opener over the 2N. That would allow opener to rebid 3♣, transferring to 3♦, over which he can pass with weakness and move with a game-acceptance, while exploring contracts other than 3N. This sequence would interfere with the handling of a minimum 5=0=4=4 hand (which would be shown by 3♠, transferring to ♣, which in turn is an awkward solution) but this and similar transfers over invitational 2N bids are powerful tools. They are not, however, standard.

Your sequence underbids both hands by roughly a trick each.

[mike777]

guess you could say 3NT....but pard could still be on a minimum...

Kx QJxxx KJx QJx


Axxxx x AQxxx xx

AQxxx xx Axxxx x

Axxxx K Qxxx Kxx

Axxxx AK QTxxx x


3NT isn't so hot on all of these, including the last one where you can actually make 5D (or maybe 4H), so (like the given hand) if you just bid 2NT, pard can bid 3D showing 5-5 and extras, and you have a chance to reach a making game.

btw 2nt for me is often around 12-13 hence the no 2/1 g/f. If Winston does not open lite then none of this matters. But a very hard hand in my style of 2/1, congrats who bid this one.

[Winstonm]

mike777, on Sep 6 2005, 06:11 PM, said:

guess you could say 3NT....but pard could still be on a minimum...

Kx        QJxxx        KJx    QJx


Axxxx    x              AQxxx  xx

AQxxx  xx            Axxxx    x     

Axxxx    K          Qxxx      Kxx

Axxxx    AK          QTxxx    x


3NT isn't so hot on all of these, including the last one where you can actually make 5D (or maybe 4H), so (like the given hand) if you just bid 2NT, pard can bid 3D showing 5-5 and extras, and you have a chance to reach a making game.

btw 2nt for me is often around 12-13 hence the no 2/1 g/f. If Winston does not open lite then none of this matters. But a very hard hand in my style of 2/1, congrats who bid this one.

Just for the record, Mike, we separate majors from minors when considering opening hand strength; we strive to reach the 10-trick games and become more solid in the quest for 3N or the 11-trick game suggested by openings in a minor.

I opened first seat this hand: J10975, AK853, void, J75; had this hand been the minors I wouldn't have considered it for a second.

A weak major/minor hand would have to be strongly major oriented, again striving not to miss the major suit game: AQ9xxx, x, KJ9x, x. For some this is a middle hand - for us it is a bottom end.

Winston