[mike777]

6nt

x...AJxx..QJx...KQJ9x

[mikeh]

I would expect 1=4=3=5 most often. He has only one keycard and no ♥Q yet viewed his hand as 'working' opposite a natural 2♠ game try.

We have, it seems to me, 4 choices: 5♥, 6♣, 6♥ and 6N.

Fred has an advantage, in that he knows Brad's style, at a level of detail that is impossible to communicate completely in this forum format. Thus he may know that Bard could not have, for example, x Jxxx QJx AKQJx... indeed, I would not expect my partner to hold that on this auction myself. So I will exclude that hand type.

That means that I expect (as a minimum) something along the order of x AJxx Qxx KQ10xx.

No slam is good opposite that, but 6♣ and 6N are better than 6♥.

If we make a minor change to x Axxx Qxx KQJxx, then both 6N and 6♣ are superior to the no-play 6♥ and, also, 5♥: 5♥ will probably fail on any 4-1 trump break, while 6♣ and 6N survive slightly more than half the 4-1♣ breaks (Axxx onside or stiff A onside).

Change the hand to 2=4=2=5, and I am not as optimistic, but that shape is less attractive for the 4♥ call, so maybe I can hope for the Jx♠ or the ♥J along with the good ♣, and in either case, both 6N and 6♣ are preferable to any ♥ contract.


I had trouble coming up with hands on which 6♣ was superior to 6N, and there seem to be more hands (altho few) where 6N offers more flexibility (i.e. some squeeze chances). Plus 6N scores better when it makes and probably identically when it fails (not that I worry too much about the number of undertricks when venturing a slam )So I bid 6N.

In doing all of this, I have tried to ignore the implications of question 3 in the context of being given that ♥9

[benlessard]

In 6c He could have the ace of clubs and no ace of h in wich case a ♥ lead wont be fun Expert opposition can underlead the ♥A because they know you are missing the Q♥. so 6nt seems like the best contract.


A-

x
Ajxx
Qxx
KQT9x

B-
x
jxxx
Qxx
AKQxx


C-
x
Axxx
Qxx
KQJTx


As for finding tough play problem. All i see is a clubs guess or a h guess.



Unless partner partner only have 4♣ and extra values. But im sure its not that.

Jx
JTxx
Qxx
AKQJ



edited

Maybe partner doesnt have the ♦Q in wich case 6♣ seems better.

[Walddk]

benlessard, on Feb 20 2006, 08:20 PM, said:

In 6c He could have the ace of clubs and no ace of h in wich case a ♥ lead wont be fun Expert opposition can underlead the ♥A because they know you are missing the Q♥. so 6nt seems like the best contract.

No. Brad showed 1 key card for *hearts*, so he has ♥A and not ♣A.

Roland

[cherdano]

mikeh, on Feb 20 2006, 09:14 PM, said:

I had trouble coming up with hands on which 6♣ was superior to 6N.

If Brad had x Axxx Jxx KQJTx, then 6♣ only requires hearts to be 3-2 (pitch two hearts on the spades and ruff out the suit), which seems superior to the squeeze chances in 6N.

Arend

[awm]

Surely partner has 4♥ to bid a heart game. Since he doesn't have any of the top three spade honors, it seems kind of odd to accept a spade game try. I don't think something like a 2425 thirteen count with two small spades would be an accept. So this pretty much marks Brad with singleton spade. Fred has 19 high, so the pair should be off at most 9 or so points (okay it depends on how light Brad opens). These points include the ♥Q and an ace, and almost surely the ♠J. If Brad had solid clubs, like AKQxx, he might have tried to show them over 2♠. So most likely he has the ♥A and not the ♣A. Similarly if he has something like 1426 shape with six really good clubs (KQJxxx say) he might've tried to show those. So by far the most likely pattern is 1435, and this should include the ♥A and the ♣KQ. That's only nine points so he has to have some of the ♦Q and/or stray jacks. I think one of these hands is likely:

x
AJxx
Qxx
KQxxx

x
Axxx
Qxx
KQJxx

x
AJxx
Jxx
KQJxx

Opposite the first hand, 6♥ seems best. To make 6♣ or 6NT, you need clubs to break with the ace onside. To make 6♥, you can pitch a club on the diamond queen, so you need hearts to behave (3-2 with queen on, or possibly 4-1 break onside if Brad has the heart ten). On the second hand, 6NT is excellent, whereas 6♥ has no play (6♣ is about the same as 6NT barring really bad breaks in non-club suits). On the third hand, 6♣ will be best since the ruff of the third diamond can provide trick twelve.

If partner can be consulted this is probably best. Most likely partner will put us in 6♥ on the first hand and 6♣ on the second and third. If I had to simply guess a contract, 6♣ might be the best shot.

[Walddk]

I don't think he is 1435 with KQJxx or similar in clubs. In that case he would have jumped to 4♣ to show a spade splinter! With the same pattern and a diamond splinter, he could bid 4♦ which would also imply a good club suit.

There is no doubt in my mind: he is 2425, the only shape without a splinter, and where he is good enough to accept the game try.

Roland

[han]

Walddk, on Feb 20 2006, 02:23 PM, said:

benlessard, on Feb 20 2006, 08:20 PM, said:

In 6c He could have the ace of clubs and no ace of h in wich case a ♥ lead wont be fun Expert opposition can underlead the ♥A  because they know you are missing the Q♥. so 6nt seems like the best contract.

No. Brad showed 1 key card for *hearts*, so he has ♥A and not ♣A.

Roland

Please explain what you meant here Roland, the club ace is a keycard for hearts...

[Walddk]

Hannie, on Feb 20 2006, 08:39 PM, said:

Walddk, on Feb 20 2006, 02:23 PM, said:

benlessard, on Feb 20 2006, 08:20 PM, said:

In 6c He could have the ace of clubs and no ace of h in wich case a ♥ lead wont be fun Expert opposition can underlead the ♥A  because they know you are missing the Q♥. so 6nt seems like the best contract.

No. Brad showed 1 key card for *hearts*, so he has ♥A and not ♣A.

Roland

Please explain what you meant here Roland, the club ace is a keycard for hearts...

True Han, but it's unlikely, because he will then have a very good club suit (no ♥A or Q), and then he might have bid 3♣ en route.

Roland

[mikeh]

cherdano, on Feb 20 2006, 02:24 PM, said:

mikeh, on Feb 20 2006, 09:14 PM, said:

I had trouble coming up with hands on which 6♣ was superior to 6N.

If Brad had x Axxx Jxx KQJTx, then 6♣ only requires hearts to be 3-2 (pitch two hearts on the spades and ruff out the suit), which seems superior to the squeeze chances in 6N.

Arend

I agree with your hand, but I did not and do not think that this hand warrants a 4♥ call. We are talking subtle nuances here, and, as I wrote, we are at a bit of a disadvantage in that Fred will be finely attuned to Brad's style: to a degree that he could not possibly communicate in any post. Iff your hand is a 4♥ call, then I would have less difficulty than I claimed in constructing hands that work for 6♣ compared to 6♥

[hrothgar]

awm, on Feb 20 2006, 10:28 PM, said:

Surely partner has 4♥ to bid a heart game. Since he doesn't have any of the top three spade honors, it seems kind of odd to accept a spade game try.  I don't think something like a 2425 thirteen count with two small spades would be an accept. So this pretty much marks Brad with singleton spade.

This is the second person who says that the decision to accept the Spade game try makes opener with a stiff Spade...

If the 2♠ advance is natural and shows values in Spades, I'd think that a stiff opposite it is a flaw, not an asset. If 2♠ were defined as a "help suit" game try or some such things would be different. (Help suit game tries ask partner to covner losers in the suit so ruffing values and controls are equally valid).

Its also important to note that one might expect that opener would advance to game with a good maximum even if he lacked the "right" hand to support Spades. Case in point: Fred chose to bid 2♠ holding AKQx in the suit... How likely is it that Brad would hold a fitting Spade honor?

[Walddk]

I doubt that many have an agreement with their partners about this. Let's assume that 2♠ is a game trial bid or better (Fred's post). How do you interpret 4♣, 4♦ and 4♥ respectively on the actual auction :

1♣ - 1♥
2♥ - 2♠
4♣
4♦
4♥

I know that I gave my interpretation in an earlier post. Here it is again for convenience:

4♣: 1-4-3-5
4♦: 3-4-1-5
4♥: 2-4-2-5

How about you?

Roland

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Feb 21 2006, 01:19 AM, said:

I doubt that many have an agreement with their partners about this. Let's assume that 2♠ is a game trial bid or better (Fred's post). How do you interpret 4♣, 4♦ and 4♥ respectively on the actual auction :

1♣ - 1♥
2♥ - 2♠
4♣
4♦
4♥

I know that I gave my interpretation in an earlier post. Here it is again for convenience:

4♣: 1-4-3-5
4♦: 3-4-1-5
4♥: 2-4-2-5

How about you?

Roland

Here are my own thoughts:

I like using 4♦ to show 3=4=1=5 shape (2-4-1-6 would also be possible)

I'm less sanguine about using 4♣ to show Spade shortage. Personally, I'd prefer to use this to define the strength of the Club suit. In many ways, the auction could be considered analagous to 1♣ - 1♥ - 4♣. Obviously, the sequence being discussed show a much weaker, but I still like using it to describe the suit.

I'm also not sure whether the 4♥ rebid should explicitly promise 2=4=2=5 shape (even though I suggested that Brad was likely to hold 2=4=2=5) For example, what would the "correct" bid be with 3=4=1=5 shape and a stiff Ace or King?

[Walddk]

hrothgar, on Feb 20 2006, 11:47 PM, said:

Walddk, on Feb 21 2006, 01:19 AM, said:

I doubt that many have an agreement with their partners about this. Let's assume that 2♠ is a game trial bid or better (Fred's post). How do you interpret 4♣, 4♦ and 4♥ respectively on the actual auction :

1♣ - 1♥
2♥ - 2♠
4♣
4♦
4♥

I know that I gave my interpretation in an earlier post. Here it is again for convenience:

4♣: 1-4-3-5
4♦: 3-4-1-5
4♥: 2-4-2-5

How about you?

Roland

I'm less sanguine about using 4♣ to show Spade shortage. Personally, I'd prefer to use this to define the strength of the Club suit.

You can show that by bidding 3♣ followed by 4♥. Then you have 4♣ free as a spade splinter. I don't fear that 3♣ will be passed, because 2♠ establishes a force to at least 3♥ in my opinion.

Roland

[luis]

For the bidding I think his distribution has to be 2-4-2-5, at least that is in my view the most expected shape he can have for the bidding. He might have something like:
Jx
AJxx
xx
KQJxx

or

xx
AJxx
xx
KQJxx

or

Jx
AT8x
Qx
KQJTx

I would bid 6NT because if there is a problem in clubs or hearts the contract is not inmediately down, since there will be squeeze chances. If I choose to play in clubs or hearts instead I commit myself to find a good trump break and since there's nothing to ruff at all I think that 6NT will bring most chances to our side.

[mike777]

luis, on Feb 20 2006, 06:11 PM, said:

For the bidding I think his distribution has to be 2-4-2-5, at least that is in my view the most expected shape he can have for the bidding. He might have something like:
Jx
AJxx
xx
KQJxx

or

xx
AJxx
xx
KQJxx

or

Jx
AT8x
Qx
KQJTx

I would bid 6NT because if there is a problem in clubs or hearts  the contract is not inmediately down, since there will be squeeze chances. If I choose to play in clubs or hearts instead I commit myself to find a good trump break and since there's nothing to ruff at all I think that 6NT will bring most chances to our side.

I do not understand bidding 4H with any of these hands. When do you bid 3H? I assume your opening one bid promised some values? Are all of these a mandatory opening bid let alone a jump to 4h in Fred's system?

[luke warm]

i agree with mike, which is why i can't buy the 2425 hand.. if, as fred said, 2S was a game try (or was taken as such by brad), and if (as happened) brad accepted this try, 2425 doesn't fit.. the possible shapes that would accept a game try in spades seems to be limited to

1435 or just possibly 3415
4405
4414
(1444 ruled out by the opening)

so i repeat my earlier question - why can't brad have a 3 suited hand short in diamonds (in addition to the possible short in spades hand)? would *you* accept a game try with a doubleton in pard's trial suit? i wouldn't

[cherdano]

luke warm, on Feb 21 2006, 02:11 AM, said:

i agree with mike, which is why i can't buy the 2425 hand.. if, as fred said, 2S was a game try (or was taken as such by brad), and if (as happened) brad accepted this try, 2425 doesn't fit.. the possible shapes that would accept a game try in spades seems to be limited to

1435 or just possibly 3415
4405
4414
(1444 ruled out by the opening)

so i repeat my earlier question - why can't brad have a 3 suited hand short in diamonds (in addition to the possible short in spades hand)? would *you* accept a game try with a doubleton in pard's trial suit? i wouldn't

I certainly would if I were generally maximum for my previous bidding.

Anyway, I am 99.9% sure Brad won't have 4 spades, as he would show the double fit by raising to 3♠.

Arend

[awm]

I just don't see why a 2-4-2-5 twelve count is a game bid. These seem to be pretty trashy openers, often including queen or jack in the short suit and very minimum values. The spade try hasn't really improved a hand with xx or Jx in spades all that much. Perhaps something like:

Jx
AJxx
Qx
KQJxx

would be an accept on pure power. Once again, 6NT and 6♣ look pretty good with 6♥ looking not so good.

[luke warm]

cherdano, on Feb 20 2006, 07:32 PM, said:

luke warm, on Feb 21 2006, 02:11 AM, said:

i agree with mike, which is why i can't buy the 2425 hand.. if, as fred said, 2S was a game try (or was taken as such by brad), and if (as happened) brad accepted this try, 2425 doesn't fit.. the possible shapes that would accept a game try in spades seems to be limited to

1435 or just possibly 3415
4405
4414
(1444 ruled out by the opening)

so i repeat my earlier question - why can't brad have a 3 suited hand short in diamonds (in addition to the possible short in spades hand)? would *you* accept a game try with a doubleton in pard's trial suit? i wouldn't

I certainly would if I were generally maximum for my previous bidding.

Anyway, I am 99.9% sure Brad won't have 4 spades, as he would show the double fit by raising to 3♠.

Arend

in that case brad is 3415 (with ♠JTx) else 1435.. if he's 2425 maybe he would accept with a max hand, i don't know...