BBO Discussion Forums: Worth exploring slam or too flat? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Worth exploring slam or too flat? BBF vs JEC Jan 24, bd 13

#1 User is offline   diana_eva 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,854
  • Joined: 2009-July-26
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:bucharest / romania

Posted 2015-February-04, 02:24

From BBF vs JEC on Jan 24. That was a game we could have won, BTW.

Playing 15-17, no thorough agreements but competent partner, so assume exp standard:



Would you try to explore slam or sign off? If looking for slam, what's the best way to go about it?
Also, would you have staymaned in the first place, or done something else?

#2 User is offline   gordontd 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,485
  • Joined: 2009-July-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-February-04, 02:36

View Postdiana_eva, on 2015-February-04, 02:24, said:

From BBF vs JEC on Jan 24. That was a game we could have won, BTW.

Playing 15-17, no thorough agreements but competent partner, so assume exp standard:



Would you try to explore slam or sign off? If looking for slam, what's the best way to go about it?
Also, would you have staymaned in the first place, or done something else?

I'd explore, by bidding 3, which shows a forcing heart raise.
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
0

#3 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-February-04, 10:02

View Postgordontd, on 2015-February-04, 02:36, said:

I'd explore, by bidding 3, which shows a forcing heart raise.

Yes. And then whatever partner does to cooperate, I would subside in 4H...suggesting pretty much the concentration of stuff. In other words, I would not really be the one "exploring", more like "suggesting". And I think this hand is very, very close to NOT suggesting slam.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#4 User is offline   ArtK78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,786
  • Joined: 2004-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Galloway NJ USA
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
    Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2015-February-04, 10:15

I believe that "expert standard" is that 3 would be a forcing heart raise with a shortness, while 4 is a forcing heart raise without a shortness. If I am correct, then 4 is the proper bid. If partner bids 4 over 4, I will abide by his decision.

Unfortunately, given that partner has JTxx of hearts at best, it is unlikely that he will cooperate in a slam venture. But I owe him a try. And if partner has something like KJx JTxx Ax AQxx for his 1NT opening (or better - give partner the AJx of spades and some 10s), perhaps he will make a move.
0

#5 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-February-04, 10:23

View PostArtK78, on 2015-February-04, 10:15, said:

I believe that "expert standard" is that 3 would be a forcing heart raise with a shortness, while 4 is a forcing heart raise without a shortness. If I am correct, then 4 is the proper bid. If partner bids 4 over 4, I will abide by his decision.

Unfortunately, given that partner has JTxx of hearts at best, it is unlikely that he will cooperate in a slam venture. But I owe him a try. And if partner has something like KJx JTxx Ax AQxx for his 1NT opening (or better - give partner the AJx of spades and some 10s), perhaps he will make a move.

3S, as a non-descript Slam try for hearts gobbles up enough room. I would be very surprised if people who thought about it would use 4D for that. I think the more space we consume, the more descriptive that bid should be.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#6 User is offline   gordontd 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,485
  • Joined: 2009-July-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-February-04, 10:56

View PostArtK78, on 2015-February-04, 10:15, said:

I believe that "expert standard" is that 3 would be a forcing heart raise with a shortness, while 4 is a forcing heart raise without a shortness.

I'd have expected that to show a diamond shortage, 4C a club shortage and 3S no shortage or a spade shortage. But it may well be there is no real "standard".
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
0

#7 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,029
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2015-February-04, 11:20

Hi,

if you want looking for slam, the best way is to start with a forcing heart raise,
most would use 2S over H for this.
If you have it, use it, not doing it is understandable but lazy.

Added later:
3S instead of 2S would be a splinter, but the discussion shows, what "most would use"
is worth.

With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
0

#8 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-February-04, 12:33

View PostP_Marlowe, on 2015-February-04, 11:20, said:

if you want looking for slam, the best way is to start with a forcing heart raise,
most would use 2S over H for this.
If you have it, use it, not doing it is understandable but lazy.

2S over a 2H response is usually taken for some other purpose; that doesn't make it lazy.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#9 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,029
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2015-February-04, 12:57

View Postaguahombre, on 2015-February-04, 12:33, said:

2S over a 2H response is usually taken for some other purpose; that doesn't make it lazy.

The "lazy" remark was meant, that not making a slam move would be lazy.
So better wording may have been: Set hearts in a forcing manner, if you
can, and see, if partner reacts positive.
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
0

#10 User is offline   ArtK78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,786
  • Joined: 2004-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Galloway NJ USA
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
    Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2015-February-04, 13:29

View Postaguahombre, on 2015-February-04, 10:23, said:

3S, as a non-descript Slam try for hearts gobbles up enough room. I would be very surprised if people who thought about it would use 4D for that. I think the more space we consume, the more descriptive that bid should be.

It is pretty descriptive. 4 hearts, slam try values, no shortness. If you use 3 as a generic forcing heart raise, you are then going to start groping around to try to find out more information.
0

#11 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Göttingen, Germany
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2015-February-04, 13:41

View Postaguahombre, on 2015-February-04, 10:23, said:

3S, as a non-descript Slam try for hearts gobbles up enough room. I would be very surprised if people who thought about it would use 4D for that. I think the more space we consume, the more descriptive that bid should be.

How about Grant Baze? Or the people you have seen on Vugraph? http://www.bridgebas...-after-stayman/
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#12 User is offline   masse24 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 341
  • Joined: 2009-April-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago Suburbs

Posted 2015-February-04, 15:46

Definitely exploring slam.

Undiscussed, I bid 3, which should be a forcing raise.

If agreed, I prefer 3 to agree and show undisclosed shortage.
4 agrees trump with no shortage, requests Q-bids.
4 is RKC.

Modified Baze
“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” George Carlin
0

#13 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-February-04, 19:14

View Postgordontd, on 2015-February-04, 10:56, said:

I'd have expected that to show a diamond shortage, 4C a club shortage and 3S no shortage or a spade shortage. But it may well be there is no real "standard".


View Postgwnn, on 2015-February-04, 13:41, said:

How about Grant Baze? Or the people you have seen on Vugraph? http://www.bridgebas...-after-stayman/

Yep, Gwnn, as I mentioned in your research thread, I posted it because we were thinking seriously of changing to the Baze/other experts' method. And, we decided Gordon's method was less space-consuming when space is needed because Responder is flat and concentration of strength is important. Sometimes you just can't inject expert methods into my duffer's head.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#14 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,092
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2015-February-04, 22:54

I'd hunt. Hopefully partner can cooperate, but we both know his hearts suck.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#15 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2015-February-05, 00:38

View PostPhil, on 2015-February-04, 22:54, said:

I'd hunt. Hopefully partner can cooperate, but we both know his hearts suck.

When two relatively balanced hands actually end up with 31 HCP, but have persisted to the 5-level anyway, and are missing exactly the three key trumps, it will be a bad day. If it has happened to us once, our quota for a lifetime is reached.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#16 User is offline   0 Subrata 

  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 2014-August-12

Posted 2015-February-05, 03:31

3 is the proper bidding, it means partner Heart suit is agreed and I am starting cue bidding.

Thx

Subrata Basak

user i.d.- 0 Subrata
0

#17 User is offline   gordontd 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,485
  • Joined: 2009-July-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-February-05, 03:37

View Post0 Subrata, on 2015-February-05, 03:31, said:

3 is the proper bidding, it means partner Heart suit is agreed and I am starting cue bidding.

Good luck with trying that out on an unsuspecting partner!
Gordon Rainsford
London UK
0

#18 User is offline   diana_eva 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,854
  • Joined: 2009-July-26
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:bucharest / romania

Posted 2015-February-05, 04:43

Thanks all. Here's what happened, and I'm still unsure where the inconsistency in my train of thoughts lies:

Pd opened 1NT, I was South. My first GIB style impulse was to bid a straight 4NT quanti. Then, I stopped and thought some more, and realized if we have a fit, we might belong in slam.
So I bid stayman and partner gave the 2 response. Now, I got stuck. I knew we're 30+ HCP with a fit, which to my mind was plenty for slam.

I did not know how to explore intelligently. I didn't know that 3 can be a forcing heart raise, I thought it would show spade shortness. Anything else wd have been either a natural side suit or splinter, so I just blasted 6.

Something broke between "this hand sucks for 6NT" and "30+ points in a suit contract = slam".

The other table bid

1NT - 2
2 - 4

So I wondered how reasonable it is to think slam at all.

#19 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2015-February-05, 06:47

View Postdiana_eva, on 2015-February-05, 04:43, said:

So I wondered how reasonable it is to think slam at all.


My guess is that if your only two choices were 4 and 6, blasting slam would be the better option.

Without any fancy agreements, I quite like 5 if partnering a good player.
0

#20 User is offline   MrAce 

  • VIP Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,971
  • Joined: 2009-November-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 2015-February-06, 17:01

View Postdiana_eva, on 2015-February-05, 04:43, said:

Thanks all. Here's what happened, and I'm still unsure where the inconsistency in my train of thoughts lies:

Pd opened 1NT, I was South. My first GIB style impulse was to bid a straight 4NT quanti. Then, I stopped and thought some more, and realized if we have a fit, we might belong in slam.
So I bid stayman and partner gave the 2 response. Now, I got stuck. I knew we're 30+ HCP with a fit, which to my mind was plenty for slam.

I did not know how to explore intelligently. I didn't know that 3 can be a forcing heart raise, I thought it would show spade shortness. Anything else wd have been either a natural side suit or splinter, so I just blasted 6.

Something broke between "this hand sucks for 6NT" and "30+ points in a suit contract = slam".

The other table bid

1NT - 2
2 - 4

So I wondered how reasonable it is to think slam at all.


It is reasonable to to think slam. But to say 30-31 hcp with only 8 card fit and balanced vs balanced is plenty for slam, is an overstatement imo.
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"

"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."





0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users