[plaur]

---

1 NT(15-17) - ? (opener will not have 5 spades unless very poor suit)

Is this hand worth a slaminvite?

1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - 4♥ for a slam invite or
1NT - 4♦ - 4♥ - 4NT RKCB or pass

[Walddk]

Pure guessing if you do it that way. I would like to see how well the hands fit first, and get spades into the picture:

1N - 2♦
2♥ - 2♠

Shortly, I will be a little wiser. 2NT is not what I like to hear. Then opener has 3 spades and 2 hearts and I will probably sign off in 4♥. If he has 4 spades or/and 3 hearts, I will like it much better. Then perhaps I can make a slam try.

Mind you, even if we have a fit, perhaps two fits, it's not at all obvious that we belong in slam. It will all depend on how many wasted values he has in diamonds.

We could have a grand on, but game may also be the limit.

Roland

[mike777]

1nt=2d
2h=4d=splinter, slam try.

[Walddk]

mike777, on Jul 22 2006, 01:12 AM, said:

1nt=2d
2h=4d=splinter, slam try.

I don't like that approach at all. We don't know if we want to play in hearts yet. I'll give partner a good hand for a change (although only a 15 count):

♠ AKxx
♥ Ax
♦ Axxx
♣ xxx

6♥ is not a good contract, but 6♠ is fair. And now I will give him a hand with a great fit for both majors (still only a 15 count):

♠ AKxx
♥ Axxx
♦ Axx
♣ xx

7♥ has no play whereas 7♠ is excellent.

Roland

[mikeh]

I am certainly not endorsing the second approach: texas and then 4N. Never, ever, ever ( and I mean, never) bid keycard when you don't know what to do after you hear the answer. Here, you cannot possibly get answers via keycard that give you any help.

You need to know about the ♠K and you need to know how to dispose of your ♣ losers... the ♦A will take care of one, but not both of them, and you sure aren't going to find out much about the ♣Q.

Partner has AKx Axx xxxx KQx and 6♥ is cold and 7 not bad. He has Axx xxx AQJx KQx and I don't like your chances in 6♥. The same hcp and the same shape and the same keycard response.

Make the responding hand slightly stronger and I'd texas and then bid 5♦ Exclusion keycard, but the hand is not quite good enough.

So I transfer and then bid 2♠ if available (for me it usually isn't since I usually play this sequence as another hand type). I don't like splintering into the suit below trump... it requires opener to make a big decision on limited info. and, in this case, the wrong info... I repeat what I have often said... splintering into a void should be a-voided if possible.

Sure the ♦A is a pitch but Kxx Axx in the pointed is not the same here as AKx xxx

So if 2♠ were unavailable, I would cheat via 3♣, intending to get back to 4♥ eventually unless I got real encouragement. There is some safety since partner won't think xx in ♥ is good for a slam in ♣, and Qx or Ax will help me when I convert ♣ back to ♥.

Edit: i posted in the context of a ♥ slam evaluation and, of course, Roland is absolutely right: this hand should not commit to ♥. So let me start over with 2♣ followed by smolen and then another move...depends on your smolen structure... if smolen unavailable, then 2♦ transfer and 2♠

[mike777]

Walddk, on Jul 21 2006, 06:44 PM, said:

mike777, on Jul 22 2006, 01:12 AM, said:

1nt=2d
2h=4d=splinter, slam try.

I don't like that approach at all. We don't know if we want to play in hearts yet. I'll give partner a good hand for a change (although only a 15 count):

♠ AKxx
♥ Ax
♦ Axxx
♣ xxx

6♥ is not a good contract, but 6♠ is fair. And now I will give him a hand with a great fit for both majors (still only a 15 count):

♠ AKxx
♥ Axxx
♦ Axx
♣ xx

7♥ has no play whereas 7♠ is excellent.

Roland

bidding 2d and then 2s is not forcing for me so not an option. Imperfect solution to a tough problem, yes I would expect to miss 6s.

I thought of smolen but even that gets pretty messy and maybe confusing in the long run but that would be my second choice. Smolen would help if partner has 4s but if not it is going to be tough to show 6 hearts and a d void.

[Winstonm]

I prefer 1N-2C-2D-4D, secondary Texas, showing the 46 shape. Over 4H, I'll make one try with 5C and will respect a 5H sign off.

[1eyedjack]

I rate it as a slam try, but I would not be using any Texas. I would start by showing 4-5-1-3 shape and lie about the D void and 6th H. Should be able to show the 6th H later if it becomes relevant, but I may not get to show the D void. Still that should wake partner up to whether his values are working. I would likely miss the granny if it is there.

[FrancesHinden]

I would use whatever methods I have to show my shape and see what partner does. For me, the same as Roland: transfer to hearts and bid spades.

With a slightly stronger hand I would transfer to hearts, bid spades and then bid clubs showing a 3-suiter, but I think I'm not quite good enough for this as we are unlikely to be making slam in a 5-3 club fit.

[willow23]

Wow...there are many ways to bid this hand...

Can go with...

1NT-2♣
??? - Depending on the response...If partner bids 2♦ then use smolem ..bid 3♠ to let partner know you have 4♠ and 5♥..If partner bids 2♠ then hooray! ask for aces/key cards whatever..

Can go with ..

1NT-2♦
2♥-4♦(splinter)...this auction may miss a !s fit...although p mus have a heart fit ..4/4 fits are superior to 5-3, 6-2 when discards are needed:)....

Transfer to ♥ and then show ♠ .is invitational..you will cry if p passes 2♠ with a min 15 hcp:)..You need a game forcing auction

Depending on your arrangements ..you can also try 4♦..xfer to ♥ and then bid 4♠ but you and p need to agree that this auction is slam-going before hand:)

But to answer the short of it...yes ...I think the hand belongs in slam ..especially as a fit must exist in ♥.

[Winstonm]

Here is once again a weird thought from my somewhat convoluted mind:

With 6/4 majors, what would be the problem with transferring into the 4 card major and then jumping in the 6-card suit as a mild slam try.

You resplace splinter jumps with this:

1N-2D
2H-3S 4 hearts, 6 spades

1N-2H
2S-4H. 4 spades, 6 hearts.

If partner super accepts the transfer, you have found your fit.

The benefit over splinters is partner knows his cards in majors have significant extra value, whereas a transfer and then splinter on some hands may have him overrate cards in the non-splitered minor.

[luke warm]

now doesn't it seem much easier playing 2 way stayman here and having opener describe his hand?

playing standardish, i like winston's sequence

[1eyedjack]

luke warm, on Jul 22 2006, 09:13 PM, said:

now doesn't it seem much easier playing 2 way stayman here and having opener describe his hand?

It depends what you expect partner to describe about his hand. If he gets to show his concentration of values in Diamonds opposite a shortage that presumably you have yet to show, then maybe.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

one simple option would be stayman,
followed by a jump to 3H (or if you play
smolen, a jump to 3S), ... 3H is simpler.

That is game forcing, and you will discover,
if partner has 3 card support, and if yes,
if he has a max. NT, opener, because he will
bid either 4M or make a cue bid.

The 6th card, can be shown later, ... over 3NT
simply bid 4H, because.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[luke warm]

1eyedjack, on Jul 22 2006, 03:28 AM, said:

I rate it as a slam try, but I would not be using any Texas. I would start by showing 4-5-1-3 shape and lie about the D void and 6th H. Should be able to show the 6th H later if it becomes relevant, but I may not get to show the D void. Still that should wake partner up to whether his values are working. I would likely miss the granny if it is there.

well for one thing, we find out immediately his shape... after that, controls (if interested in slam), then scan...

[1eyedjack]

luke warm, on Jul 23 2006, 02:03 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Jul 22 2006, 03:28 AM, said:

I rate it as a slam try, but I would not be using any Texas.  I would start by showing 4-5-1-3 shape and lie about the D void and 6th H.  Should be able to show the 6th H later if it becomes relevant, but I may not get to show the D void.  Still that should wake partner up to whether his values are working.  I would likely miss the granny if it is there.

well for one thing, we find out immediately his shape... after that, controls (if interested in slam), then scan...

I could go down that route using my methods, starting with a 2C response (no need for 2-way stayman). Most methods should give you a choice between describing and relaying, the relay starting with either 2C or 2D response depending on methods, 2C being perhaps a bit cheaper (well, quite a lot cheaper really, if Fibonacci has anything to say).

I take the view that if responder is distributional then in order to justify his captaining the auction in preference to describing his own distribution he needs to have a lot of extras in reserve, ie just about a slam force. I don't put this hand into that category, but perhaps I should do.

Partner's precise distribution is not of huge interest to me on this hand - From a shape viewpoint I just want to know what the trump suit should be. If I captain the auction I sure want to know something about his shape, but much of the finer tuning after a trump suit is established could be taking out a round of bidding space for little benefit. Then partner's total controls will be of some value, but that value is limited until I know how many of them are in Diamonds. Finally I don't know how much control you have over the order in which suits are scanned. Can you scan the Diamond suit before the others?

[Echognome]

luke warm, on Jul 23 2006, 01:03 AM, said:

well for one thing, we find out immediately his shape... after that, controls (if interested in slam), then scan...

Relays after a 1NT opening do not seem to be as efficient in my view. For starters, you have many more shapes possible in a 1NT opening than you would, for say, a 1NT response to a strong club (in a relay system). For example, do you allow for a 5 card major? for a 6 card minor? So, I'm guessing your shape is not going to be resolved on average until 3♠ or so. Then with balanced hands you are going to be scanning all four suits. Clearly if you could have relayed out your hand, you wouldn't need to scan diamonds. The advantage is that opener can then judge his holding opposite your diamond shortage. It's going to be much tougher to judge your diamond void opposite his holding when you won't find it out until practically the slam level. Furthermore, opener will continue to waste space telling you about his diamonds even when you don't care. (will it make a difference if opener is AQx or Axx? KQx or KJx?) Thus, designers of relay systems usually prefer the balanced hand to ask and the shapely hand to tell. This, in fact, is called "The Balanced Hand Principle" by David Morgan from the Bridge World, Dec 1989 (referenced from Roy Hughes "Building a Better Bidding System").

[Walddk]

This is the "Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion" forum. I think all beginners and intermediates are lost by now.

Roland

[luke warm]

Echognome, on Jul 23 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

luke warm, on Jul 23 2006, 01:03 AM, said:

well for one thing, we find out immediately his shape... after that, controls (if interested in slam), then scan...

Relays after a 1NT opening do not seem to be as efficient in my view. For starters, you have many more shapes possible in a 1NT opening than you would, for say, a 1NT response to a strong club (in a relay system). For example, do you allow for a 5 card major? for a 6 card minor? So, I'm guessing your shape is not going to be resolved on average until 3♠ or so. Then with balanced hands you are going to be scanning all four suits. Clearly if you could have relayed out your hand, you wouldn't need to scan diamonds. The advantage is that opener can then judge his holding opposite your diamond shortage. It's going to be much tougher to judge your diamond void opposite his holding when you won't find it out until practically the slam level. Furthermore, opener will continue to waste space telling you about his diamonds even when you don't care. (will it make a difference if opener is AQx or Axx? KQx or KJx?) Thus, designers of relay systems usually prefer the balanced hand to ask and the shapely hand to tell. This, in fact, is called "The Balanced Hand Principle" by David Morgan from the Bridge World, Dec 1989 (referenced from Roy Hughes "Building a Better Bidding System").

as for when opener's dist is known, it depends on his exact shape, but all shapes are known by 3nt... and 5cM are allowed but not 6cm... i've not read the article you reference, but going by the assumption that one must choose one's authorities, i base my view on (apart from satisfied experience) rosenkrantz and truscott... i do grant that 2 way might not be as efficient in a strong nt

anyway, i'd like to see the 2 hands..

[keylime]

My detailed explaination is outside the scope of this forum.

You have a hand that is good, and without any agreements it's a hand that you want pard's input on.

I start with this auction:

1NT-2D
2H - 2S

At this point, if you play Smolen, you by implication are showing 4-6-x-x. Now if pard has a 5 card diamond suit your hand is in the toilet, and if they hold a five card club suit your hand upgrades some. The one bid that causes some trouble is a 2NT rebid by pard, showing 3-2-4-4 shape. Now you're on a guess on what to do.

I tend to believe that pard doesn't have what you need for a slam try more often than not.