[mike777]

Hannie, on May 4 2006, 12:20 PM, said:

When I had this hand at the table I did choose to bid 5♥. I agree with Mikeh that 4D does not guarantee a diamond control, and I was willing to risk slam if partner had one. I think that the majority is right in that 4S is better, certainly the hand mikeh gives (KQx KQxx x AQJxx) is a possible hand for partner.

? We have the K of s and ace of clubs not partner correct?

[luis]

Hannie, on May 4 2006, 05:20 PM, said:

When I had this hand at the table I did choose to bid 5♥. I agree with Mikeh that 4D does not guarantee a diamond control, and I was willing to risk slam if partner had one. I think that the majority is right in that 4S is better, certainly the hand mikeh gives (KQx KQxx x AQJxx) is a possible hand for partner.

I have the feeling that both 4♠ and 5♥ are more or less the same thing, the only good thing about 4♠ is that pd can bid 4NT and find if two keycards are missing.
They both semi-commit your hand to a slam so the decision is practically the same.

Luis

[whereagles]

4♠ is definitely better than 5♥ because it allows pard to use RKCB.

Why do you want pard to bid RKCB? Because...

1) he's the strong hand, so he will probably know what to do with the info he'll get, AND

2) he probably has enough controls to be able to RKCB, whereas you definitely don't.

[jdonn]

whereagles, on May 4 2006, 12:50 PM, said:

4♠ is definitely better than 5♥ because it allows pard to use RKCB.

Why do you want pard to bid RKCB? Because...

1) he's the strong hand, so he will probably know what to do with the info he'll get, AND

2) he probably has enough controls to be able to RKCB, whereas you definitely don't.

You are right. And

3) After 4♠ then an RKC answer, you have left nothing unsaid. That will show your spade control, your club ace, and your heart length (as the equivalent of the heart queen, which you will show). Ok it might not show the diamond queen, I can live with that

[han]

Well, it is quite likely that partner has the heart queen, so you won't get to show your heart length Josh.

[joshs]

jdonn, on May 4 2006, 01:00 PM, said:

whereagles, on May 4 2006, 12:50 PM, said:

4♠ is definitely better than 5♥ because it allows pard to use RKCB.

Why do you want pard to bid RKCB? Because...

1) he's the strong hand, so he will probably know what to do with the info he'll get, AND

2) he probably has enough controls to be able to RKCB, whereas you definitely don't.

You are right. And

3) After 4♠ then an RKC answer, you have left nothing unsaid. That will show your spade control, your club ace, and your heart length (as the equivalent of the heart queen, which you will show). Ok it might not show the diamond queen, I can live with that

Hmm, and why is 4N over 4S rkc? And for what suit? I defenitely don't think hearts have been agreed. Partner can have a strong hand with primary clubs.

In general in this auction, with a weak hand you bid the cheapest possible strain, if partner corrects, cue bids or raises you can re-evaluate. With a strong hand you usually:
a. jump
or
b. cue bid the opps suit
or
c. bid a 5N pick a slam

Now what is a new suit? I am not sure there is universal agreement about that. A new suit above 4H has to be a slam try (since partner might have just had a good 4H bid) but its not clear to be that it is or should be a cue bid.

Personally, I think 5H on this hand is clear since you have extras and an undisclosed feature (long hearts). I do wish the heart suit was stronger, but partner can suggest 6C with bad heart support, or bid 5N pick a slam with only moderate heart support.

Yes it would be nice if partner's cue bid agreed hearts, then the auction would be easy, but as that is the only strong bid he has available, I really don't think thats what it means...

[mikeh]

imho, 4♦ has to agree ♥: the game is too tough otherwise: he could bid 3♠ with a good hand and ♠, 3N with a ♦ stop and running ♣, 4♣ with a very good hand and long ♣ ..... while lower-level cues are initially ambiguous, the bidding space taken up by 4♦, not to mention its bypassing of 3N, makes it inadvisable (I think) for it to be ambiguous.

Besides, if it is ambiguous, what the heck is responder supposed to do??

A rebid of 4♥ on all weak hands with 4 or more ♥... that won't help partner if he holds a non ♥ hand.

And what do you do with, say, the same hand as posted but one less ♥? And so on...

[keylime]

♠ Kxx
♥ J108xxx
♦ Qx
♣ Ax

Partner all-purposed cuebid me at 4♦. I totally and strongly disagree with 4♠ here. The Q of diamonds is a worthless value, I'm mildly offensive with the A of clubs doubleton opposite partner's likely 4-5 club holding, and the extra hearts are pivotal. I need to ask pard about his trump quality. RKC is NOT it - 5♥ is clear.

[luis]

I believe 4♦ agrees hearts and 4♣ would be forcing it doesn't make sense that opener wants to play 4♣ :-)

Luis

[han]

After an auction like 1C-1X-3C, you probably expect not to play there either, but it still makes sense to play it as non-forcing. You expect partner to bid over your 1-level opening, but most standard systems still use non-forcing openings at the 1-level.

A non-forcing call is not necessarily a suggestion to play there.

[joshs]

mikeh, on May 4 2006, 02:16 PM, said:

imho, 4♦ has to agree ♥: the game is too tough otherwise: he could bid 3♠ with a good hand and ♠, 3N with a ♦ stop and running ♣, 4♣ with a very good hand and long ♣ ..... while lower-level cues are initially ambiguous, the bidding space taken up by 4♦, not to mention its bypassing of 3N, makes it inadvisable (I think) for it to be ambiguous.

Besides, if it is ambiguous, what the heck is responder supposed to do??

A rebid of 4♥ on all weak hands with 4 or more ♥... that won't help partner if he holds a non ♥ hand.

And what do you do with, say, the same hand as posted but one less ♥? And so on...

Well a hand with 4 hearts that is too good for 4H opposite what was merely a 1H response is not really more common than the hand with long clubs. Of course you stretch to bid 4 on hands only worth 3 in this situation so you have to cue bid on hands worth 4.

partner has 1 of 2 hand types
a. 4 hearts and about 19/20+ in support of hearts
b. 6+C and about a 20 count (maybe lighter with a strong 7 card suit)

So what does he do if he had type b? Thats easy he cue bids then bids 5C/4H.

I have no idea why you think thats too hard.

And like I said, over a cue-bid, responder rebids 4H to show a bad hand and every other bid describes his hand and shows interest in slam.

Now at lower levels almsot everyone plays 1C-P-1H-(2D)-3D
as ART GF, primary clubs, usually less than 3 hearts unless a hand thats too good for a jump to 4H and doesn't have a singleton diamond (so maybe a 2425 20 count that you didn't want to open 2N or 2C on). The hand type with heart support is very very rare.

At higher levels, there are more heart hands thrown in. I guess its playable to guess how many clubs to bid with the primary club hand, but I really don't like to guess when you know almost nothing about partner's hand.

[joshs]

luis, on May 4 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

I believe 4♦ agrees hearts and 4♣ would be forcing it doesn't make sense that opener wants to play 4♣ :-)

Luis

No opener doesn't want to play 4C he wants to be able to invite game on a hand the would have opened 1C and rebid 3C (a very common hand). That player doesn't want to play 3C either. He wants to invite a game without forcing to game. So you are giving him the choice between overbidding by 2 levels or selling out?

[han]

Quote

Well a hand with 4 hearts that is too good for 4H opposite what was merely a 1H response is not really more common than the hand with long clubs.

Josh, with a strong hand and long clubs you have the following options: 4C, 5C, 3NT (and perhaps 4NT?), or open 2C in the first place. That should be sufficient for almost all hands.

Quote

Of course you stretch to bid 4 on hands only worth 3 in this situation so you have to cue bid on hands worth 4.

I think that it is standard to bid 3♥ over 3♦ with some hands that would only have bid 2♥ normally, and to bid 4♥ with the best hands that would normally bid 3♥. Therefore, we really need 4♦ for the good 4♥ hands.

I think that these hands are fairly frequent, and further bidding will be significantly easier when the 4♦ bid promises 4-card heart support. It seems best to agree that 4♦ does promise that and accept that with some very unusual hand with strong clubs I will have to find a different (perhaps less than perfect) call.

[joshs]

Hannie, on May 4 2006, 02:48 PM, said:

Quote

Well a hand with 4 hearts that is too good for 4H opposite what was merely a 1H response is not really more common than the hand with long clubs.

Josh, with a strong hand and long clubs you have the following options: 4C, 5C, 3NT (and perhaps 4NT?), or open 2C in the first place. That should be sufficient for almost all hands.

Quote

Of course you stretch to bid 4 on hands only worth 3 in this situation so you have to cue bid on hands worth 4.

I think that it is standard to bid 3♥ over 3♦ with some hands that would only have bid 2♥ normally, and to bid 4♥ with the best hands that would normally bid 3♥. Therefore, we really need 4♦ for the good 4♥ hands.

I think that these hands are fairly frequent, and further bidding will be significantly easier when the 4♦ bid promises 4-card heart support. It seems best to agree that 4♦ does promise that and accept that with some very unusual hand with strong clubs I will have to find a different (perhaps less than perfect) call.

Well 4C is not forcing and 4N is rkc for hearts (I think) so you are left with 3N and 5C. Which one of them is a slam try in clubs?

Now as to opening 2C on a strong hand with clubs, thats a valid issue, the question is how strong do you have to be to GF in a minor.

I would not open 2C on AKx Kx x AKJxxxx, would you?
How about, AKx AJ A KQTxxxx? Again, I do not want to force to game opposite a random 3 count with this. If your partnerships have decided to just overbid initially with these hands, well then you may not have any hands worth a slam try opposite a 6 count, and your priorities for the cue bid change.

[mikeh]

joshs, on May 4 2006, 02:37 PM, said:

partner has 1 of 2 hand types
a. 4 hearts and about 19/20+ in support of hearts
b. 6+C and about a 20 count (maybe lighter with a strong 7 card suit)

So what does he do if he had type b? Thats easy he cue bids then bids 5C/4H.

I have no idea why you think thats too hard.

And like I said, over a cue-bid, responder rebids 4H to show a bad hand and every other bid describes his hand and shows interest in slam.

I think it is too hard, and unplayable for what seem to me to be simple reasons.

You are forcing responder to either sign off with anywhere from 4 to 7 ♥ if he has a 'weak' hand. How the heck does he make an intelligent valuation of a 'weak' hand?

Once we get beyond counting points, in terms of our ability to value hands, we start listening to the auction and paying attention to degrees of fit and the value of 'working cards'. Thus, if 4♦ agrees ♥, the posted hand grows up immensely because of our working black controls and our extra ♥ length.

Now, if partner does not promise more than 2 ♥, our hand is nowhere near as powerful: even if he has AK, he may not be able to establish the suit and return to dummy to enjoy the extra length. So responder has to guess whether his hand is slam oriented with no clue as to which suit opener thinks is trump... you'd have to be a very good mind-reader to get away with this

let's look at 2 hands consistent with your style:

In both, responder holds KJx J10xxxx xxx x

On the first, opener holds Axx AKxx x AKxxx: this hand makes for a good 6♥: whether responder is strong enough to move, knowing of ♥ support, is debatable: maybe toughen it up to KQx Jxxxxx xxx x

On the second, opener holds AQx KQ xx AKQxxx your 20 count... this is a hand that cannot make 11 tricks in either trump suit, so responder has to sign off.

But your treatment is even more problematic than that suggests.

You are announcing a force to an 11 trick ♣ contract even if the partnership has an 8 or 9 card ♥ fit and fewer ♣!!

Let's turn it around: give opener AQx KQ xx AKQxxx and vary responder's hand.

With Kxxx 109xx Qx Jxx we are doomed no matter where we play but we'd rather be in 5♣ than in 4♥. With Kxx J1098xx Qx xx, we'd like to be in 4♥. But we cannot distinguish these hands because responder has to rebid a poor 4 card suit at the 4-level!

There are other examples I could create, other sequences in which the ambiguity of your treatment is destructive of any semblance of intelligible bidding, but I think readers will get the idea.

So that's why (in part) I think your treatment is too tough

[jdonn]

joshs, on May 4 2006, 02:37 PM, said:

Well a hand with 4 hearts that is too good for 4H opposite what was merely a 1H response is not really more common than the hand with long clubs. Of course you stretch to bid 4 on hands only worth 3 in this situation so you have to cue bid on hands worth 4.

partner has 1 of 2 hand types
a. 4 hearts and about 19/20+ in support of hearts
b. 6+C and about a 20 count (maybe lighter with a strong 7 card suit)

So what does he do if he had type b? Thats easy he cue bids then bids 5C/4H.

I have no idea why you think thats too hard.

This is the most staunchly I have ever disagreed with you I not only have always played this 4♦ bid shows heart support, but have always considered it completely standard and mainstream, in fact I'm shocked that you would think otherwise. The problem is that responder's hand evaluates different opposite the hand types. Like Qxx Kxxxxx Axx x, I would be quite happy to hold this opposite a strong heart raise and would just bid keycard for hearts, but I have no clue what to do if partner might have clubs in which case I (probably?) want to stop in 5♣.

If opener has a strong hand with clubs, and couldn't bid 3NT or double over 3♦ which are both valid options on certain strong hands with clubs, then he bids 5♣ now, I don't see why that would be a problem. I would do that on both your examples from another post. 4♣ isn't forcing, fine, but it doesn't show peanuts, you certainly don't have to stretch to bid 5♣ on marginal hands.

[luis]

joshs, on May 4 2006, 07:40 PM, said:

luis, on May 4 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

I believe 4♦ agrees hearts and 4♣ would be forcing it doesn't make sense that opener wants to play 4♣ :-)

Luis

No opener doesn't want to play 4C he wants to be able to invite game on a hand the would have opened 1C and rebid 3C (a very common hand). That player doesn't want to play 3C either. He wants to invite a game without forcing to game. So you are giving him the choice between overbidding by 2 levels or selling out?

I don't believe in invitations when pd doesn't have the information he needs to take an educated decision.
If 4♣ is an invitation when is pd supossed to pass and when is he supossed to bid 5 ? Maybe he flips a coin or something?
Invitations may be fine when you ask pd to pass or accept based on some criteria, I hte general invitations, pd will always bid game when in doubts and since he will always be in doubt in this auction then the 4♣ bid becomes forcing.

Luis

[joshs]

Like I said, its valid to play this as just a heart raise (but it certainly doesn't have this meaning below game) but I didn't think that was standard. If 4D is a heart raise then I think the best use for 4N is a 5.5 club bid, not rkc for anything, but this is obscure (it is the best way to play in my opinion, since you could never bid rkc in clubs anyway, and if you wanted to bid rkc in hearts just cue-bid first)...

While everyone is at it, what does everyone expect in terms of strength and shape for
a. 1C-P-1H-3D-3S
b. 1C-P-1H-3D-4S
c. 1C-P-1H-3D-x followed by the cheapist number of spades

[joshs]

luis, on May 4 2006, 04:23 PM, said:

joshs, on May 4 2006, 07:40 PM, said:

luis, on May 4 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

I believe 4♦ agrees hearts and 4♣ would be forcing it doesn't make sense that opener wants to play 4♣ :-)

Luis

No opener doesn't want to play 4C he wants to be able to invite game on a hand the would have opened 1C and rebid 3C (a very common hand). That player doesn't want to play 3C either. He wants to invite a game without forcing to game. So you are giving him the choice between overbidding by 2 levels or selling out?

I don't believe in invitations when pd doesn't have the information he needs to take an educated decision.
If 4♣ is an invitation when is pd supossed to pass and when is he supossed to bid 5 ? Maybe he flips a coin or something?
Invitations may be fine when you ask pd to pass or accept based on some criteria, I hte general invitations, pd will always bid game when in doubts and since he will always be in doubt in this auction then the 4♣ bid becomes forcing.

Luis

Thats nice. And somehow you flip a coin on the auction 1N-4N and occasionally get it right?


Apology for sarcastic tone found 2 posts down...

This post has been edited by joshs: 2006-May-04, 17:29

[jdonn]

joshs, on May 4 2006, 04:30 PM, said:

luis, on May 4 2006, 04:23 PM, said:

joshs, on May 4 2006, 07:40 PM, said:

luis, on May 4 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

I believe 4♦ agrees hearts and 4♣ would be forcing it doesn't make sense that opener wants to play 4♣ :-)

Luis

No opener doesn't want to play 4C he wants to be able to invite game on a hand the would have opened 1C and rebid 3C (a very common hand). That player doesn't want to play 3C either. He wants to invite a game without forcing to game. So you are giving him the choice between overbidding by 2 levels or selling out?

I don't believe in invitations when pd doesn't have the information he needs to take an educated decision.
If 4♣ is an invitation when is pd supossed to pass and when is he supossed to bid 5 ? Maybe he flips a coin or something?
Invitations may be fine when you ask pd to pass or accept based on some criteria, I hte general invitations, pd will always bid game when in doubts and since he will always be in doubt in this auction then the 4♣ bid becomes forcing.

Luis

Thats nice. And somehow you flip a coin on the auction 1N-4N and occasionally get it right?

Well I'll spring to the defense of Luis, just to prove we aren't out for blood with each other. Josh I can say anything to, we have to like each other we are the Josh's

When it goes 1NT 4NT, you can count high card points on your fingers and be relatively accurate.

When partner invites somehow with 4♣, it's not nearly as clear exactly what his range is, nor where your values will be useful (between hearts and spades anyway.)

I think it's a valid point that inviting in general is not so wise when you think partner will have a hard time evaluating accurately, either because of your hand or the auction. I don't quote him often, but Mike Lawrence sort of covered this idea in his book on hand evaluation.