[AthosINT]

---

Playing a natural system how would you bid these 2 hands with North dealer, and no bids by the opponents.

The beginning of the auction as i see it :
1♦ 1 ♥ 3♦ 3♥ 3NT 4♣ 4♦ 4♥ 4♠. Now we want to sail to 6 ♣, but i guess not everyone will agree on this auction, and everyone may choose another way afterwards.

[Gerben42]

I'm not sure about the 3♥ rebid by responder, and after that it's not clear that ♣ are trumps - at all. Anyway, it's good to know what partner expects from 3♦.

If you want to respond 3♦ responder may have to bid 4♣ next to find that suit. Not easy at all.

[mr1303]

Playing a natural system, you don't. You pretty much need to play relays to get to 6C on these cards. I'd end up in 6NT or 6D playing a standard system, most likely 6NT after:

1D 1H
3D 6NT

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

trying to reach 6C scientic, on a 4-3 fit with "only" 30HCP
playing natural methods is nearly impossible, and I will
not even bother trying to construct an auction, sry -
get real.

Most likely you will stop in 3NT, and only if you are desparate
and playing IMP's you will leave the safe heaven of 3NT,
good luck.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[FrancesHinden]

Do I want to be in 6C? I struggle to see it making on a spade lead with diamonds 4-1, and it diamonds are 3-2 I want to play in 6D which doesn't need clubs to break.

[Walddk]

mr1303, on Jan 24 2006, 03:44 PM, said:

Playing a natural system, you don't. You pretty much need to play relays to get to 6C on these cards. I'd end up in 6NT or 6D playing a standard system, most likely 6NT after:

1D 1H
3D 6NT

Sounds good enough to me. A 68% slam is much more than I can usually hope for . Let the scientists play in 4-3 fits at slam level if they want.

Roland

[Echognome]

Yeah. I was thinking about the relay auction, which for us would have gone:

1♦(1) - 1NT®
2NT(2) - 3♣®
4♥(3) - 4♠®
5♠(4) - 6NT


® relay
(1) 11-15+
(2) single-suited diamonds, middle shortage
(3) 3=0=7=3 with 5 controls (already known to hold Kxx --- AKxxxxx Kxx)

I would now make another check in case North's diamonds are solid, but would hear the much expected:

(5) = ♦A and K, ♠A or K, ♣A or K

I would now settle for 6NT. Funnily enough, if South had opened, NT would have been wrong-sided, so we would end up in 6♦. If North had AKQ of ♦ South may decide for the grand if he felt like it. If North showed AKQJ of ♦, then an easy 7NT bid.

I cannot imagine playing in clubs unless North has 4 of them.

As for the natural bidding, Mark's sequence has some appeal, but a lot depends on your bidding style for 1♦ rebid 3♦. Depending on the quality of North's diamonds and outside shape, you may want to be in any of 6♦, 6NT, 7♦, or 7NT.

[pbleighton]

I think a 3D rebid is pretty aggressive on 13 hcp with a void in pd's suit. Are you sure you would do this at the table?

My auction would go 1D-1H-2D-3C-3S-3NT.

Boo hoo.

Peter

[inquiry]

For those of you who try to avoid 4-3 fits, spend the ten dollars and buy online access to Larry Cohen's "my favorite 52". Pay particular attention to "hand" number 8. I put hand in quotes because it is actually many more than one hand (yes, there is some bonuses when you buy this, his favorite 52 is more like 60... .).

As far as slams, I prefer 6D to 6C.

[kenrexford]

I do not understand the logic on many of these posts. My auction:

1D-P-1H-P-
2D(only one more diamond than expected, and minimum)-P-3C(Forcing)-P-
3D(seventh diamond now on table, plus decent HCPs for no 3D open)-P-3S(cue)-P-
4C(slammish cue)-P-4H(two top honors, no diamond honor)-P-4S(out-of-focus major, so RKCB for diamonds)-P-
5C(1430 -- three)-P-???

Opener now could bid 6C as choice if that is the agreement here, but 6D is probably more practical.

Note the key aspects of this:

(1) Why jump rebid on a minimum??? A seventh diamond will emerge later.
(2) 3S as a cue, with a reciprocal 4C cue, establishes clear slam direction.
(3) 4H as a cue denies the diamond Queen (bypassed 4D)
(4) 6C as choice would be a nice treatment if bid by Opener, who is limited by his failure to jump rebid.

[mikeh]

I would never get close to 6♣, and agree with others that there seems to be no logical standard method that allows you to do so.

This is a tough enough problem just trying to get to any slam, let alone a 4-3.

I would not personally jump to 3♦ with a void in partner's suit and only two kings on the side. That would get responder creating a force with 3♣ over my 2♦. If opener then bid 3♠, where does that leave responder? He has significant extras but no apparent source of tricks. I think that 4N here should be quantitative, since there has been no suit agreement, and it is hard to construct a hand on which 4N would be keycard but not biddable over 2♦, but many players treat almost all 4N bids as keycard.

Certainly, 4N quantitative works very well here: opener has an easy 6♦ bid.

Absent that, it seems to me that responder is really stuck for a call: 3N could be correct, but seems awfully conservative.

Clearly, if opener were to upgrade to an aggressive 3♦ over 1♥, partner will drive to slam and will probably chose 6N to protect the round suit tenaces.

[AthosINT]

pbleighton, on Jan 24 2006, 11:08 AM, said:

I think a 3D rebid is pretty aggressive on 13 hcp with a void in pd's suit. Are you sure you would do this at the table?

No ! Did not realize it at the time.

I would have bid 2!d actually. The hand was given to me after the auction had begun 1!d 1!h 3!d. But i disagree with it.

so 1!d 1!h 2!d 3!c 3!d and then ?

[luke warm]

with me playing 2/1 i guess it'd go

1d : 1h
2d : 3c
3d : 6d

[pbleighton]

"I would have bid 2!d actually. The hand was given to me after the auction had begun 1!d 1!h 3!d. But i disagree with it.

so 1!d 1!h 2!d 3!c 3!d and then ?"

I have to confess 3NT. Singleton 8 in pd's 7 card suit doesn't look so good. I would bid 4NT as quantitative, except that I don't play it that way in any partnership.

Peter

[Kalvan14]

pbleighton, on Jan 24 2006, 03:47 PM, said:

"I would have bid 2!d actually. The hand was given to me after the auction had begun 1!d 1!h 3!d. But i disagree with it.

so 1!d 1!h 2!d 3!c 3!d and then ?"

I have to confess 3NT. Singleton 8 in pd's 7 card suit doesn't look so good. I would bid 4NT as quantitative, except that I don't play it that way in any partnership.

Peter

I play 4NT quantitative, after an auction:
1♦-1♥-2♦-3♣-3♦

3♣ is 100% GF, and, in my partnership, 4♦ is RKC agreeing diamonds.
17 HCP, and a singleton in diamonds, true. Still, it is a very nice hand with a lot of controls. Pard has a maximum for his bid, and will accept the slam try with 6♦.
I will most likely convert to 6NT, to protect my honors.

IMHO, 6♦ or 6NT can be bid (and they are not bad slams, depending only on an even distribution of diamonds. I will never end up playing 6♣, which in any case is an inferior slam.

[HeartA]

AthosINT, on Jan 24 2006, 09:27 AM, said:

---

Playing a natural system how would you bid these 2 hands with North dealer, and no bids by the opponents.

The beginning of the auction as i see it :
1♦ 1 ♥ 3♦ 3♥ 3NT 4♣ 4♦ 4♥ 4♠. Now we want to sail to 6 ♣, but i guess not everyone will agree on this auction, and everyone may choose another way afterwards.

3D was too much, with void in pd's suit and 13 HCP (though D suit was decent). 3H after 3D was not good either, which also contradicts 4C after 3N: since you determined to introduce C at 4 level, why not immediately? 3H and then 4C didn't show much extra info. Instead, it distorted the hand, telling at least 6-4 in H-C.

The auction had better go like:
1D-1H-2D-3C-3D-3S-3N-4D...6D.

[Winstonm]

I think this has a chance in natural bidding.

1D-1H
2D-3C
3D-3S
4C-4H
4S-6C.

Winston

[AthosINT]

Ok, thank you all for the answer, i see that many roads were taken, which should mean it was not trivial anyway

[dcvetkov]

luke warm, on Jan 24 2006, 01:49 PM, said:

with me playing 2/1 i guess it'd go

1d : 1h
2d : 3c
3d : 6d

Are u sure you will blast to 6 with that hand with a singleton at the table?
It smells on a misfit , heart honours do not pull the full values and partner trumps may be Kjxxxx, and he can have a lot less then the actual hand

Playing partner for perfect cards is not very winning, IMO
It is true that smal will probably be reached if partner jumps to 3D, but that it is a overbid, slight, bit still overbid

[joker_gib]

1♦ 1♥
2♦ 3♣
3♦ 3♠
3NT 4NT
6♦

Alain