[haver]

Scoring: MP

Bidding goes
1CL - 2DI (weak) - 2SP - Pass - ?

---

Original q was: What do u bid??

Well, u bid 3DI (some of u would bid 4, but never mind - and ur expert partner answers 3NT - now how do u picture his hand? And how do u continue?

[mcphee]

I would advance now with 4H which should give partner a valid idea of the hand I have.

[Codo]

Oh, I fogot one advantage for a direct 4 Diamond bid: Pd is unable to bid 3 NT.
Now, I bid 4 Clubs to show my nice suit and SI.
I don`t play much with partners who just even think about passing 4 Club now,so this bid will contain my message.

[whereagles]

Now I have a bit of a problem because I haven't showed the spade support yet

I suppose I could try 4-something now, but how is pard supposed to figure out I have spade support up my sleeve? Things can get very messy very quickly.. even an RKCB 4NT might be taken as some sort of quatitative invitation. Since 4♠ might be the last opportunity to do something both sensible and safe, I'll take that, though not happy about it because I haven't shown neither the diamond singleton nor the good clubs.

[jdonn]

AQxxx xxx xxx xx is an ok slam right? Add either black suit jack and it's really good. Partner will never believe so little (less than he can even have) is enough for slam. I will splinter 4♦, only because it's the clearest way to set spades as trumps so that partner will know my 4NT bid next is keycard for spades. If I am sure that by agreement 4NT now is keycard for spades rather than for clubs or straight blackwood then I would simply bid keycard now.

I think doing anything less is simply failing to appreciate this hand's potential, and bids like 3♦ will just confuse the auction.

[han]

jdonn, on Apr 24 2006, 10:38 AM, said:

AQxxx xxx xxx xx is an ok slam right? Add either black suit jack and it's really good. Partner will never believe so little (less than he can even have) is enough for slam. I will splinter 4♦, only because it's the clearest way to set spades as trumps so that partner will know my 4NT bid next is keycard for spades. If I am sure that by agreement 4NT now is keycard for spades rather than for clubs or straight blackwood then I would simply bid keycard now.

I think doing anything less is simply failing to appreciate this hand's potential, and bids like 3♦ will just confuse the auction.

Some might play that a splinter followed by 4Nt (after a sign-off) is exclusion RKC.

If there is no such danger then I agree with Josh. I certainly dislike the ambiguous 3D bid.

[jdonn]

Hannie, on Apr 24 2006, 10:54 AM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 24 2006, 10:38 AM, said:

AQxxx xxx xxx xx is an ok slam right? Add either black suit jack and it's really good. Partner will never believe so little (less than he can even have) is enough for slam. I will splinter 4♦, only because it's the clearest way to set spades as trumps so that partner will know my 4NT bid next is keycard for spades. If I am sure that by agreement 4NT now is keycard for spades rather than for clubs or straight blackwood then I would simply bid keycard now.

I think doing anything less is simply failing to appreciate this hand's potential, and bids like 3♦ will just confuse the auction.

Some might play that a splinter followed by 4Nt (after a sign-off) is exclusion RKC.

If there is no such danger then I agree with Josh. I certainly dislike the ambiguous 3D bid.

Perhaps. It's not that I love the splinter, the real point I'm trying to make is I just want to bid keycard for spades, and will do it in whatever way makes partner understand my 4NT bid is keycard for spades.

[whereagles]

jdonn, on Apr 24 2006, 04:05 PM, said:

It's not that I love the splinter, the real point I'm trying to make is I just want to bid keycard for spades, and will do it in whatever way makes partner understand my 4NT bid is keycard for spades.

Well, why not simply bidding 4NT over 2♠? This must surely be RKCB for spades

[jdonn]

Jlall, on Apr 24 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

I do not share the view that jdonn has that he already knows which slam hes going to play in, or that he will play in slam at all. If I really had to guess a trump suit at this point, it would probably be clubs not spades.

Jdonn gives a nice example of pard having AQJxx and out. Sometimes partner has less than perfect values though. Also, what will jdonn do if pard shows all the keycards? 7C or 7S? 7S would be pretty silly opposite AQxxx Kx Ax xxx.

After the keycard response I bid 7♣ to offer partner the choice, and surely he will pick clubs with three of them and the worst spade holding possible. It's not 100% that partner will choose right since for example he might not pass 7♣ with that hand but 5332 (I presume you meant to make partner 5233 with that example since it's missing a card) but I like the odds, and partner is aware after all if he holds AQxxx of spades that this is his worst spade holding possible on the auction when I offer a choice.

Have you noticed you call me Josh when you agree with me but Jdonn when you don't? I am consistent, you are Lall all the time. !h

[jdonn]

Go back to my first post, I bid 4♦. I guess that should show four spades anyway, but after 7♣ he will probably figure out that I have only 3 since I offered him the choice later, which would be kind of silly with Kxxx of spades. But even if I'm wrong about that, I'm just saying that I did support spades first.

Besides even if partner totally misunderstands and always passes 7♣ I'm probably ok, though not definitely. At least it's a relatively safe place to have a slight misunderstanding if we must have one.

You're right about partner correcting to 7NT, in fact he will always do that with the spade JT, or AQJxxx of spades, or spade jack and red suit king, since in all those cases he can count 13 top tricks as long as he presumes I hold six solid clubs (seven is more likely maybe but he surely won't take that risk.)

[mikeh]

I earlier voted for 3♦, and I disagree with any suggestion that this bid introduces any real ambiguity. Sure, 3♦ does not yet show the ♠ fit, but any bid (other than 4N or 5♣ etc) over 3N sure does! And I am NOT passing 3N... who would?

The main downside of 3♦, which no-one mentioned, was that you may have trouble after a 3♠ continuation: a bid by partner that is void of any positive information: but contains some useful negative information: he lacks a ♦ stopper. That in turn makes slam in ♠ more likely, even tho 3♠ showed nothing extra, the fact that he lacks minor suit cards and the ♠K suggests a slam suitable hand: no partner of mine would have bid 2♠ with AJxxx Qxx xxx xx for example.

I will not go into my choice after 3♠, since the question supposes a 3N bid.

Any bid by me is now slammish: even 4♠ is a slam try, since I did not bid either 3 or 4♠ last time, but cue first.

I also think that 4♥ is a slam try in support of ♠: with any 5=6 round suit hand, I would never cue: I would have bid a forcing 3♥.

But I don't like 4♥: it prevents partner from bidding 4♦, which would leave me an easy keycard.

So I choose 4♣: aware that I may be committing the cardinal and frequent sin of claiming that my bid shows my hand when in reality it shows something else: self-sufficient ♣ and no interest in 3N: I don't think I'd bid that way with Kx Ax xx AKQJxxx for example: I'd raise 3N to 4N.

So I do think that 4♣, on this sequence, should 'convert' the initially ambiguous 3♦ into a cue in support of ♠.


As for splintering: this is ok if you play last train: since partner bid 4♥ over 4♦. If you do not play last train, you are going to be guessing after the likely 4♠.

Having said all that, I really don't think that this is clear one way or the other: my suspicion is that a good partnership will reach the best spot (most of the time) whether one chose 3 or 4♦

[han]

Mike, you play with better partners than I do. Perhaps you are right that partner should figure out that 3D followed by 4C shows spade support, but I'm afraid that my partners would play me for something like Kx Axx x AKQJxxx (edited your hand by moving one diamond to hearts).

Heck, I'm even worried that my partners wouldn't read 3D followed by 4H as spade support, while I agree with you that they should. While 4♦ is far from perfect, it will likely keep us from having serious misunderstandings.


Disclaimer: I am not thinking about any particular partner while writing this. It is rather a comment about the level I play bridge at myself.

[jdonn]

Hannie that is sort of how I feel. 3♦ may be the best bridge bid technically, but I am really really worried about the ambiguity of many followups. I am just looking for a way to keep things simple and at least avoid disasterous misunderstandings. Whatever may seem logical to you may not seem logical to partner as for what all the bids mean after 3♦ - 3NT. As an example, I might think 3♦ then 4♣ is a very good hand but with non-solid clubs since you pulled 3NT. I would never figure out that it is suppose to show spade support.

[jdeegan]

Why not bid 4♣ over pard's 3NT? If I don't get 4♦, showing the ace, then, I think that it won't be my place to drive this auction to slam. With one sure loser, the prospects of an internal loser in spades (or even hearts tho less dangerous) is worrisome. If pard has extras, it will be his place to push the hand.

After 4♦, I can bid the obvious 4♥ on my way to six or even seven, probably in clubs, given any encouragement at all from pard. I figure to have a decent play for six (clubs or spades) even opposite a shabby min like:

QJ9xx
KJ9
A10x
10x

[mikeh]

jdonn, on Apr 24 2006, 01:53 PM, said:

Hannie that is sort of how I feel. 3♦ may be the best bridge bid technically, but I am really really worried about the ambiguity of many followups. I am just looking for a way to keep things simple and at least avoid disasterous misunderstandings. Whatever may seem logical to you may not seem logical to partner as for what all the bids mean after 3♦ - 3NT. As an example, I might think 3♦ then 4♣ is a very good hand but with non-solid clubs since you pulled 3NT. I would never figure out that it is suppose to show spade support.

Certainly a valid point, but (and this is risky... hoping partner is on the same wavelength), it is difficult to construct a hand that is worth 3♦ and then 4♣ with a non-solid ♣suit.

Even if one could, in my view such a hand ought to be handled by 3♣, not 3♦.

Surely 3♣ is forcing: the game is unplayable if 2♠ did not create a one-round force. If we accept that notion (and I recognize that one player's 'standard' is another's 'weird treatment'), then there can be no reason not to bid 3♣.

This allows 3♦ to be reserved for either ♠ support or long, strong ♣, willing to play 3N opposite a ♦ stopper.

If you accept this style (and I am not 100% sure that all 3 of my regular expert partners would, but I think they would), then 4♣ has to be a cue in support of ♠.

I would risk it with a regular expert partner, because, no matter what 4♣ is taken as showing, I have some chance of landing on my feet, and if partner is indeed on the same wavelength, I am going to have a very smooth auction.

The splinter avoids these problems at the expense of creating others. Partner will and should treat a trump holding of AJxxxx or even Axxxxx as adequate for grand since he will think he has a 10 card fit (or small if he lacks the ♦A).

And I hate splintering into a suit when I have all the Aces of the suits between my splinter and trump. This latter issue can be minimized by playing last train...but nothing minimizes the trump length issue if partner lacks the queen.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Apr 24 2006, 08:34 PM, said:

The splinter avoids these problems at the expense of creating others. Partner will and should treat a trump holding of AJxxxx or even Axxxxx as adequate for grand since he will think he has a 10 card fit (or small if he lacks the ♦A).

Grand slams are rare. I wouldn't be worried of that, especially since pard might well have the queen himself and/or can finesse it through his LHO.

A mix-up, however, is much more frequent than a grand slam, and the splinter avoids that.

[Codo]

Quote

The splinter avoids these problems at the expense of creating others. Partner will and should treat a trump holding of AJxxxx or even Axxxxx as adequate for grand since he will think he has a 10 card fit (or small if he lacks the ♦A).

And I hate splintering into a suit when I have all the Aces of the suits between my splinter and trump. This latter issue can be minimized by playing last train...but nothing minimizes the trump length issue if partner lacks the queen.

There are tools to avoid this dilemma, like RKCB. As Partner is lacking at least three Key cards, he surely won`t bid 4 NT with his hand too often.
So, with AJxxxx, Kxx,Axx,x, or better, he may bid 4 NT, but even then, the Grand has some play.
And with AJxxx,Kxx,Ax,xx, or worse, he will bid 4 Heart or 4 Spade and you can ask him about his KCs and later place the contract.