[FrancesHinden]

Kalvan14, on Mar 16 2006, 09:31 AM, said:

Does this mean that you agree with N's bid?

No.

[Codo]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 16 2006, 05:21 PM, said:

Forgetting partner's actual hand for the moment, I'd love all those who say 'partner has denied a diamond control with 4S' to tell me how much they enjoy playing dodgy 5-level contracts when they have a diamond control but don't have 11 tricks.

I don't even have to change the hand very much to get there: something such as

Jxxxx
QJx
Kx
Axx

opposite

Axx
AKx
xx
KQJxx

Hi Frances,

I guess yours and Rolands Dialogue in the bidding had been:

1♣ !I have 15+ HCPS) 1♠ (1 Have 8+ HCPS and 5+ Spades
3♠I have 3 Spades 4♣ (I have more then 8 HCPS and a control)
4 ♥ I have Heart Control 4 ♠ Do you have minimum? I may have or have not a diamond control but no slam without a max.
5 ♣ I have extras...
rest is easy

my dialogue had been:
1♣ I have 15+ HCPS) 1♠ (1 Have 8+ HCPS and 5+ Spades
3♠I have 3 Sp. + extras (else 4 ♠) 4♣ (Then I have SI and control in clubs)
4 ♥ I have Heart Control, nothing in Diamond 4 NT Keycards?

rest is easy.

So even without Ser. 3 NT the opener had showed enough to reach a slam without any problem.
With this tool, this hand is too easy to talk about.

If I understood you correct, you prefer opener to bid 3 ♠ with "any hand" and have to make a (easy) guess at the 5. level. I prefer to give more information into the raise and have no guess at the 5. level. (Of course, there are other hands, where responder won`t like my 4 Spade bid and has to make a guess at a high level then.

[Walddk]

Codo, on Mar 16 2006, 12:27 PM, said:

Hi Frances,

I guess yours and Rolands Dialogue in the bidding had been:

1♣ !I have 15+ HCPS) 1♠ (1 Have 8+ HCPS and 5+ Spades
3♠I have 3 Spades 4♣ (I have more then 8 HCPS and a control)
4 ♥ I have Heart Control 4 ♠ Do you have minimum? I may have or have not a diamond control but no slam without a max.
5 ♣ I have extras...
rest is easy

Ceratinly not as far as I am concerned. I would not have bid 4♠ with the North hand, and I suspect Frances is on the same wavelength. Maybe a new mixed partnership in the making (if Jeffrey approves)

Roland

[mr1303]

This is one thing that I've noticed that a lot of players do, and it drives me insane when sitting opposite me. They start off making a cue-bid, and then when partner reciprocates, they sign off because they feel that their cue-bid was an over-bid in the process. Partner, holding two low (or equivalent) in the suit that they bypassed, decides that they're off the first two tricks and so passes, missing a good cold slam.

If you're unsure about whether or not you're worth a cue-bid, don't make one in the first place. If you're worth one in the first place, you have to follow through.

[cherdano]

Like Frances, I disagree with all those who think a 5♦ cue-bid is mandatory even with a minimum hand thus far. IMO, it is a lot easier to guess controls when we know how good partner thinks he is for slam, than to guess about his overall strength when we know his controls...

I also disagree with Codo that 3♠ should show slam interest. There is a good reason fast arrival has become out of fashion opposite an unlimited partner.

Arend

[Codo]

♠

Walddk, on Mar 16 2006, 09:08 PM, said:

Ceratinly not as far as I am concerned. I would not have bid 4♠ with the North hand, and I suspect Frances is on the same wavelength. Maybe a new mixed partnership in the making (if Jeffrey approves) 

Roland

Surely, this particular hand does not fit a 4 ♠ bid in any way. I just tried to understand, what it should have been in your view.

[Walddk]

Codo, on Mar 16 2006, 03:04 PM, said:

♠

Walddk, on Mar 16 2006, 09:08 PM, said:

Ceratinly not as far as I am concerned. I would not have bid 4♠ with the North hand, and I suspect Frances is on the same wavelength. Maybe a new mixed partnership in the making (if Jeffrey approves) 

Roland

Surely, this particular hand does not fit a 4 ♠ bid in any way. I just tried to understand, what it should have been in your view.

North has 3 options in my opinion, and 4♠ is not one of them. 4NT, 5♦ and 5♠ which will all guarantee a diamond control because opener has denied one. I have two aces and a good spade suit, and since opener is unlimited I think it's best to leave the decision to him.

5♠ would be my first choice, 5♦ second and 4NT third. If he has a very good hand, he can proceed with 5NT (key card ask). What I cannot do, however, is to tank for 5 minutes and then bid 4♠. Sure I have a diamond control now, but that is UI to partner.

It can't have come as a big shock to responder that the tray came back with 4♥ on it. When he bid 4♣ he should have anticipated this and made a decision over 4♥ much faster than he did.

This is quite simple actually. What would opener have done after an a tempo 4♠, denying a diamond control too? Pass without hesitation. Why they needed an AC to adjust the score I will never understand. It should have been clearcut for the TD to make the correct ruling.

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

Walddk, on Mar 16 2006, 03:26 PM, said:

It can't have come as a big shock to responder that the tray came back with 4♥ on it. When he bid 4♣ he should have anticipated this and made a decision over 4♥ much faster than he did.

Absolutely. I would have bid 5D over 4H on the North cards, by the way.

This is a particularly difficult auction because both hands are completely unlimited. Think how much easier the 'slam-killing' 2NT opening would make it, because South has limited their hand quickly.