[awm]

I thought this board was interesting because many relay systems will not find the grand slam. The main issue is that the ♠J is a huge card. If the strong hand is doing the asking, you're unlikely to be able to relay out the jacks in time to stop in 6♦ if the ♠J was a small card.

Of course, reaching 6♦ is relatively easy in most methods.

I'm not particularly convinced by Roland's auction to the grand, because it's not clear to me how the bidding would be any different if north held two small spades instead of jack-doubleton (okay perhaps xx ATxx Kxxx QJT is not enough for a 2NT rebid, but you can add the diamond queen or change the club queen to the king). Certainly the south hand will bid the same way, and north will probably bid keycard, and has to bid 5NT to confirm all the relevent keycards... and south will be looking at the same spade suit...

Free's Fantoni-Nunes auction seems to have similar issues. Yes, you can certainly reach a grand in natural methods by just "taking the plunge" but I've yet to be convinced that the same plunge won't reach an awful grand off the spade jack.

Inquiry's auction relies on responder not raising what's usually a 3♥ preempt to the game level holding four-card support and short spades. In this case there's plenty of space for north to do the asking and correctly evaluate the spade jack. But it's unclear to me how well this would work in practice, first because north probably would bump to 4♥ (the auction after the 4♥ bump is not very convincing) and second because the inferences from the DCB sequences over these misiry openings seem very complex and it's not clear to me how often people will get them right at the table (the hands I've kibbed seem to involve a lot of misiry accidents).

My auction on the actual hand is nothing to be proud of (I was a substitute in a club game, playing with a weak partner and few agreements) but I thought it'd be an interesting one to discuss. Certainly it'd be nice to have a relay structure where the balanced hand often does the asking. Sam Ieong and I do in fact play such a structure and would have an easy auction to the grand slam, but in my other partnerships (even those where I play relays) I can't see a clear route to the grand.

[kenrexford]

This is a very difficult hand for my methods.

Not even the start is easy. Some would advocate opening 1♠ (see, e.g., Washington Standard). But, I think I avoid a world of initial problems by starting 1♦. These auctions on 6-5 minor longer are terrible!

In any event, after a 1♥ response (what else?), I cannot understand a mere 1♠. The Qx of hearts is of enhanced value now, and I do have a four-lser hand, at worst. So, I jump shift to 2♠. I am willing to commit to game.

As I play that 2NT would be Lebensohl, Responder can instead bid 3♦, showing GF and a diamond fit.

This yields problem #2. What is 3♠ by opener? Pattern completion? I suppose so.

Back to Responder. This is not clear-cut what to do next. 3NT seems logical, if only to stress the poor honor contribution internally to Opener's suits. The fourth diamond is huge, but there is a severe lack of shape. I imaging a real aution involving a 3NT call here.

Assuming this, a strange new call comes to mind. Normally, I use a jump above game into a new suit as either exclusion or a strange RKCB call, refocusing the lesser key cards to the King and Queen of the side suit. 5♣ after 3NT would sound like Exclusion. But, it is below game, technically, and seems better used as a telling bid rather than an asking bid, especially with diamonds as trumps. The telling bid I use here is a special Picture Jump, explained below.

Thus, 5♣ after 3NT should clarify the hand:

(1) 6-5 pattern (already shown)
(2) No heart control (neither honor nor shortness -- hence, QJ tight at best)
(3) shortness is clubs (per force, a void)
(4) three of the top four spade honors (conveniently known by Responder to be A-K-Q)
(5) good trumps (normally, two of the top three honors, but this is a picnhed auction -- a sixth diamond with J10 and the Ace might justify a fudge)

This causes Responder to expect AKQxx-xx-AQxxxx-void. We get lucky, probably, on the diamond fib.

The alternative is a simple 4♣ cue, which may be less double dummy (or, less practical). But, this option provides little clue as to what to do next.

Thus, I like 5♣, as not so contrived. I'd rather make a slight fib and tell a whole lot about the hand than bid a futile 4♣ and expect partner to work out the rest...

[inquiry]

awm, on Oct 2 2006, 03:18 PM, said:

But it's unclear to me how well this would work in practice, first because north probably would bump to 4♥ (the auction after the 4♥ bump is not very convincing) and second because the inferences from the DCB sequences over these misiry openings seem very complex and it's not clear to me how often people will get them right at the table (the hands I've kibbed seem to involve a lot of misiry accidents).

Sadly the biggest (and far away most common) misiry accidents I have had is the stupidest one.. where one player or the other totally forgets they are playing it and opens 3C with a club preempt. If you get the first bid right, the other bids are much easier.

It is not always that true that the bid is "usually" a preempt in hearts. In fourth seat, it is usually a strong hand. When Vulnerable versus not, the strong hand is also more often (assuming you play very disicplined preempts at those condidions). Not vul versus vul, it is of course, much more lilkely to be the weak variety. Both vul it depends upon preempting style.Also, there are hands where you know your partners bid is strong.... after pass-pass-BID and you are very weak or you have too many cards in the suggested preempt suit for it to be a preempt (I had eight once in a goulash thingee).

The Denial cue-bids are actually painful on some hand for a different reason. It tells your opponents what to lead when both of you lack a stopper. This is a nnon-trivial problem at matchpoints where the opening lead can mean a difference between a top and a bottom. And I have seen a blast to slam hands where the slam would make without this knolwedge.

On the other hand, these bids can help avoid disasters as well. There are some nice things you can do, should you desire, to probe the location of legnth and stregnth. But it is true that the auction becomes cramped on the jump raises of the alleged preempt. It does not hurt with the two hands richard added, since in both cases, you discover the heart problem in plenty of time. But with your hand, the simple idea of the sixth diamond versus the 5th becomes a prooblem.

On this hand, in addition to the 5NT bid asking for better suit, you have room for a reverse josephine bid if 6C. Since you already know partner is missign diamond Queen, this is not asking for grand when that card is held. However, I don't have any notes on this bid being looking for extra legnth in diamonds. But since, we already know opener has two hearts (at least), 6C has to be one of two things... is the thrid round control of hearts useful? Or do you have extra legnth in diamonds. These seem the only two questions that respnder would need to have answered, but there are no firm rules on which should take precedent here. I do have this bid as asking for "non-material" club king (abiliyty to ruff club after pulling trump and running trumps) when opener asked for specifically ACE in the other suit (that is after denying a club control). In this case, we know a non-material club control is of no vailue as opener can only have one club. But on this auction it is undefined if I recall correctly.

[mikeh]

I find any natural auction involving a 1♠ rebid unconvincing. I could see it if opener were 5=0=6=2, but with the actual hand, I'm forcing to game opposite even one of my 1♥ responses.

That actually helps North picture the situation a little better, altho probably not by enough.

1♦ 1♥
2♠ 3♦ shows values; would bid 2N to slow down
3♠ 4♦
5♣ 5♥
5♠ ?

On this auction, North might take the leap. After all, he knows about the 10 card fit, and he knows that South has a big hand. Give S AKxxx x Axxxxx A, which is consistent with the auction, and 7 is good. Or give him his actual hand. And the 5♠ bid should be at least AKxxx.... I don't think that AKxxx xx AQJxxx void is good enough but AKxxx Qx AQJxxx void might be, so the final guess is still a guess.

I think that this sequence is consistent with more hands that would make grand good than otherwise, but the grand/slam decision requires a substantial preponderance, not merely a majority.

However, at least the 2♠ bid gets North able to start picturing hands where grand may make. Would I really bid it as North on my auction? That would depend on who I am playing and the state of the match/event....

[akhare]

We can find 7♦ if the unbalanced hand decides to do a reverse relay.

However, my guess is that after the auction,

P (14+) - 1♣ (GF)
2♦ (reverse relay, 5+!S and 4+ ♦)

responder might take a view and bid 3N in the hopes of concealing information from the opps (it's MPs after all).

Failing that, we will likely stop in 6♦ after discovering that we are missing K♥ and Q♦.

[the hog]

Just thought about Atul's comment above. Yes if the balanced hand does a RR then 7D is certainly biddable.

One of Paul's ideas on denial cue bidding was that to stop on a suit shows either 0-3 of the top 3 honours. Given that you can easily find out that the 1C bidder hold AKQ of S, making the grand excellent. (Consider adding this idea to your version of Moscito, Richard, it has a lot of merit.)

A strong pass systemwhere you pass and then bid 1D as a GF reverse relay would get there comfortably.

[akhare]

The_Hog, on Oct 2 2006, 11:36 PM, said:

One of Paul's ideas on denial cue bidding was that to stop on a suit shows either 0-3 of the top 3 honours. Given that you can easily find out that the 1C bidder hold AKQ of S, making the grand excellent. (Consider adding this idea to your version of Moscito, Richard, it has a lot of merit.)

Actually playing relay points (A=3, K=2, Q=1), wouldn't this be a logical extension of standard control based DCBs where the first step shows AK in the suit or nothing?

BTW, has anyone done a study of control based DCB vis-a-vis RP DCB?

[Free]

The_Hog, on Oct 3 2006, 05:36 AM, said:

One of Paul's ideas on denial cue bidding was that to stop on a suit shows either 0-3 of the top 3 honours. Given that you can easily find out that the 1C bidder hold AKQ of S, making the grand excellent. (Consider adding this idea to your version of Moscito, Richard, it has a lot of merit.)

This is already in the system... Problem is if you're going to reverse relays or not, and if you CAN! Perhaps you're too strong according to the system, which becomes a problem. With the old relays with 1♦ negative, you can't even reverse after a 1NT response...

[the hog]

Actually Atul, I made a typo - the first stop shows either 0 or 3 of the top 4 hons, not the top 3 as I originally wrote.