[cherdano]

[inquiry]

cherdano, on Jul 6 2006, 12:01 PM, said:

I really like your idea of splinters denying control in the 4th suit, but not on this auction. Among the hands that can force to game and show slam interest opposite what could be a 6-count, hands without a control in the 4th suit are just too rare. (Of course, it is different in your system, when you have a forcing raise available, and can show splinter with control later.) With the sequence you are suggesting, you won't show a club void either, and more importantly not 4 spades.

Arend

Yes, well i am not going to trott out my forcing spade raise in this discussion (I use 2NT by opener after 1m-1M as "Jacoby 2NT by opener"). However, I will comment on the question of rather I can show support and or club control. I can do both.

Let's imagine a few auctions...

1H - 1S
3D - 3H
4S <<--- This shows 4S, Diamond control, and short club. Response to 4NT blackwood I would show club void.

1H - 1S
3D - 3S
4C <<--- This is spade support, cue bid, clearly short suit. In response to blackwood I would show void.

1H - 1S
3D - 3NT
4S <--- 4 card support, short club for sure.

1H - 1S
3D - 4D <<-- only ackward, but somewhat unexpected bid.
4S <<-------- could be confusing as to whether cue-bid or support. As would a 4 heart rebid be as to whether heart one suiter or cue-bid.

NOTE, I can't bid this way via my methods (where 2NT is forcing raise by opener) simply because my 3D is not forcing and promises 5D's due to a convention I play with "strong" two suiters... But it works this way just fine in normal 2/1.

[Free]

1. Cuebidding a singleton in your partner's suit seems only reasonable when you have a great fit somewhere else. I would like to be able to show a ♥ cue, but some players just don't like it. If you don't, and you don't play last train, then the only words left are "next plz".

2. After the 3NT, I think the East hand has a great one to try for a ♣ slam. 4♣ is imo the easy start.

[Apollo81]

pclayton, on Jul 4 2006, 12:00 PM, said:

Brian and I bid about 50 sets yesterday in preparation for Chicago. There were two that we had a disagreement on. I'd like to hear your opinions:

---

1♥ - 1♠
4♦ - 4♠

Unfortunately we don't play Last Train here. Any suggestions on getting to this great slam?

---

1♣ - 1♠
2♥ - 2♠
3N - Pass

We don't play structured reverses (not a bad thing in my eyes). 2♠ is neutral; 3N promises extras.

Hand #1: East's 4♠ bid is astoundingly horrible. West is stretching a bid with 4♣ but it's still probably the best bid.

Hand #3: Best bet to reach the slam is 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠-3♦. Since it's unclear what opener is doing, responder should probably bid a temporizing 3♠ and then correct 3NT to 4♣ to show a good hand. Opener's sequence should show doubt about 3NT and I don't see how it can be right for responder to sit here. Now opener can bid RKC or just plain 6♣.

[pclayton]

[jdeegan]

These are two great problem hands.

On the first one, responder knows slam is close after the splinter, but there is no convenient cue bid. I would advise either blasting with a 6♠ call or inviting with a 5♠ bid. The latter is no good if partner is a pedant who will think it asks for trumps, but otherwise, that bid looks best to me.

The second one is, I think, a good cautionary tale. The only way I see to get to the near laydown slam is to start with 2♣, so that must be the right call??? I think it is, upon some reflection. You got 20 HCP. You got a 6-4 hand with 5.5+ tricks in the 6 bagger, and a good four bagger. This is too good a hand to open for one despite the awkwardness that is sure to follow after the wretched 2♣ game forcing opening bid.

[Apollo81]

pclayton, on Jul 10 2006, 05:42 PM, said:

Apollo81, on Jul 10 2006, 10:54 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jul 4 2006, 12:00 PM, said:

Brian and I bid about 50 sets yesterday in preparation for Chicago. There were two that we had a disagreement on. I'd like to hear your opinions:

<!-- EASTWEST begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> ????? </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> ???? </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> Unknown </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> JTxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> AKQxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> Axxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td>  </td> </tr> </table> </th> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AKQxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> J </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> T9xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> QJx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- EASTWEST end -->

1♥ - 1♠
4♦ - 4♠

Unfortunately we don't play Last Train here. Any suggestions on getting to this great slam?

<!-- EASTWEST begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> ????? </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> ???? </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> Unknown </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> KQ9x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AK </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> AKJTxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AKxxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> Qxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- EASTWEST end -->

1♣ - 1♠
2♥ - 2♠
3N - Pass

We don't play structured reverses (not a bad thing in my eyes). 2♠ is neutral; 3N promises extras.

Hand #1: East's 4♠ bid is astoundingly horrible. West is stretching a bid with 4♣ but it's still probably the best bid.

Hand #3: Best bet to reach the slam is 1♣-1♠-2♥-2♠-3♦. Since it's unclear what opener is doing, responder should probably bid a temporizing 3♠ and then correct 3NT to 4♣ to show a good hand. Opener's sequence should show doubt about 3NT and I don't see how it can be right for responder to sit here. Now opener can bid RKC or just plain 6♣.

Noble - welcome to the forums.

Why would the 1=4=2=6 want to create doubt that 3N is the best contract when holding a double stop in the 4th suit?

3NT instead of 3♦ is also reasonable/maybe right. Since the hand is a really a 2♣ opener though I worry that if I bid 3NT that I have underdescribed my values. (I would still open 1♦ if not playing the convention Fred mentioned - you sort of have to)

So 3♦ not because I'm worried about diamonds; 3♦ because I'm worried about missing a slam.

West certainly can't be criticized for bidding 3NT. I doubt that any/many pairs in a typical game holding the West hand would bid anything different.

-Noble

[P_Marlowe]

mike777, on Jul 5 2006, 02:46 PM, said:

http://home.mn.rr.co...ed_reverses.htm

For this discussion, a reverse is defined as when opener's second bid is a non-jump 2-level bid of a higher-ranking suit after responder has made a 1-level bid. A reverse by opener shows 17+ points and insufficient values to bid two clubs. Structured reverses are used to help opener decide what level to set the contract. A reverse is absolutely forcing for one round, and in some cases more, but is not absolutely forcing to game.

Hi,

your definition is fine, but open is,
does a reverse promise a rebid.

There is a difference between forcing
for one round and forcing with the
promise to bid again.

Just take the auction, which crops up again
and again:

1C - 1S
2D - 2S .-)

With kind regards
Marlowe