[SoTired]

I agree with J. 2C then 4D if get a 2D rebid.

Use Smolen for 54 hands or 64 hands with slam interest when you really need to know if partner has 2 or 3 card support. It makes no sense to Smolen and then "insist". You want opener with the strong hand to be declarer. Plus, this hand has no intention of playing 3N. Why ask a question for which you don't care about the answer? All you do is give the defense help.

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Sep 27 2005, 10:51 AM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 27 2005, 07:37 AM, said:

I do play smolen with 6-4 hands, and can show the 6 card suit by retransferring over 3N. However, this is a borderline hand. I do not play delayed texas: altho it has some appeal after a 2♦ response, playing my preferred form of smolen it is generally not needed.

However, this made me think (unusual for me this early in the morning).

How about using smolen AND delayed texas. Using Smolen (1N  2♣  2♦  3♠  3N  4♦ to show the 4=6) would be  mild slam interest and using delayed texas would be sign off or responder is about to use keycard (including exclusion).

Here, delayed texas and pass.

Make it a better hand: say AQxx KJxxxx Kx x and use smolen.

Haven't thought it through (still on my first cup of coffee) and it would rarely arise.

Mike - what does the responder bid if Opener accepts the Smolen and bids 4♥, i.e. 1N - 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♠ - 4♥. I suppose with the knowledge of the 6-3 fit, this may be enough encouragement but it does put a wrinkle in the sequence.

Less hassles if responder has a 6-4 hand and the sequence starts 1N - 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♥......

well, I have always played that opener will try to cue a minor on the way to 4Major, if he has a willingness to cooperate with slam move.

This often cancels the advantage of the transfer, but r'ight-siding' the contract is never clearcut and the advantage of having the strong hand on play is diminished when the combined values are 'heavy', as they usually will be in a cue-bid sequence

[Winstonm]

(Oops. Didn't see this one right. Thought it 5/4. Oh, well. Being 6/4 I like Justin's treament.)

IMO, there are many sequences where is it correct to separate the meanings whether playing MP or IMPs, and this is one of those cases.

At MPs, it is right to find the best partscore; however, at imps, the emphasis should be on getting to game and slams.

Therefore, this hand is a good example of using "invitational or better Smolen" at the 2 level.

1N-2C
2D-2S.

Partner will bid 2N, 3N, 3H or 4H with confindence of the strength of the hand he is facing and you have told your story.

To compensate for this treatment, with a weak hand 54 you have to transfer into your long major and pass. Time to time you might play in a 5/2 instead of a 4/4 at the 2 level. Not much of a price to pay for being able to describe a game try hand adequately I don't think.

Winston

[whereagles]

It's a bit of a guess, but I would put partner to play 4♥.

However, if the partnership opens 1NT with singletons, then Stayman is in order.

[han]

Winstonm, on Sep 28 2005, 09:39 AM, said:

(Oops. Didn't see this one right. Thought it 5/4. Oh, well. Being 6/4 I like Justin's treament.)

IMO, there are many sequences where is it correct to separate the meanings whether playing MP or IMPs, and this is one of those cases.

At MPs, it is right to find the best partscore; however, at imps, the emphasis should be on getting to game and slams.

Therefore, this hand is a good example of using "invitational or better Smolen" at the 2 level.

1N-2C
2D-2S.

Partner will bid 2N, 3N, 3H or 4H with confindence of the strength of the hand he is facing and you have told your story.

To compensate for this treatment, with a weak hand 54 you have to transfer into your long major and pass. Time to time you might play in a 5/2 instead of a 4/4 at the 2 level. Not much of a price to pay for being able to describe a game try hand adequately I don't think.

Winston

If you want to play this then I suugest that you bid the major in which you have 5 so that you can stop in 2H with 4-5 in the majors. Seems more important than rightsiding. (not to suggest that I would want to play this, I don't think that there should be many auctions that show invitational hands).

[jdeegan]

Jlall, on Sep 27 2005, 08:54 AM, said:

I also like 2C followed by delayed texas if no spade fit is found. This hand is strong enough to force to game with 6-4.

Heavenly days! Delayed Texas?? What will they think of next?? Might I entreat you discuss the pros and cons of this treatment? After all, you are giving up the ever popular sequence: 1NT - pass - 2♣ - pass - 2♦ - pass - 4♦

in order to use it.

By the way, it looks to me that example hand in question might actually play better from the 4-6 side. Certainly, it would be harder to defend accurately.

[Fluffy]

splinter of course!

[TheoKole]

With nine points and the majors, I am going for game and the major decision is how to go about it.

While I am normally a bit agressive in bidding but I do not like the spots on either of the major suits, that being said my regular partner is a very good declarer and this would sway me in the bidding. With 8 points and bad spots I would use our regular sign-off bids.

I would bid Stayman on this and if I do not hear a major would would then use Delayed Texas Transfer to 4 ♥.

The bidding would go 1 NT -> 2 ♣ -> 2 ♦ -> 4 ♦ -> 4 ♥ -> Pass

Obviously if if my partner bid a major in resonse to Stayman I would raise to game in that suit. This has the advantage of right-siding the contract to the strong hand for all contracts. If my hand was 5-4 in the majors I would use Smolen, 2 ♣ Stayman and then bidding my 4 card major at the 3 level if I had a negative response, that way partner can play in the 5-3 fit if available or in 3 NT.

Theo

[Winstonm]

Hannie, on Sep 28 2005, 11:12 AM, said:

Winstonm, on Sep 28 2005, 09:39 AM, said:

(Oops.  Didn't see this one right.  Thought it 5/4.  Oh, well.  Being 6/4 I like Justin's treament.)

IMO, there are many sequences where is it correct to separate the meanings whether playing MP or IMPs, and this is one of those cases.

At MPs, it is right to find the best partscore; however, at imps, the emphasis should be on getting to game and slams.

Therefore, this hand is a good example of using "invitational or better Smolen" at the 2 level.

1N-2C
2D-2S.

Partner will bid 2N, 3N, 3H or 4H with confindence of the strength of the hand he is facing and you have told your story.

To compensate for this treatment, with a weak hand 54 you have to transfer into your long major and pass.  Time to time you might play in a 5/2 instead of a 4/4 at the 2 level.  Not much of a price to pay for being able to describe a game try hand adequately I don't think.

Winston

If you want to play this then I suugest that you bid the major in which you have 5 so that you can stop in 2H with 4-5 in the majors. Seems more important than rightsiding. (not to suggest that I would want to play this, I don't think that there should be many auctions that show invitational hands).

One of the benefits of utilizing 2-level Smolen as a 1-round force is not so much to include invitational hands but that by including invitational or better hands it frees the jumps to 3H and 3S for other uses, such as 1444 or 4144 hands. At imps, it would seem more important to get the game-going hands right and sacrifice the ability to play specifially a 4/4 fit over a 5/2 fit at the 2 level.

I wouldn't want to reverse the responses because most of the time the hand will still be game strength or even a slam try and right siding becomes more important, and besides, the concept is to make it a 1-round force so that not only are the inviational hands bid this way but so are the game force hands and slam hands.
Just seems to me that if you can add invitational hands into this mix without messing up the good hands, and that leaves another bid open for a better use, why not do it?

Winston