[Apollo81]

opps silent, NV IMPs

1♦-3♣-?

♠AK10x ♥Ax ♦Kxxx ♣Axx

3♣ was invitational

[pclayton]

Apollo81, on Jan 15 2007, 09:31 AM, said:

opps silent, NV IMPs

1♦-3♣-?

♠AK10x ♥Ax ♦Kxxx ♣Axx

3♣ was invitational

I'm having a little trouble coming up with hands where 6♣ is a great spot. Ordinary 3♣ calls with: xx, Kxx, xx, KQJxxx in spite of the perfect majors make it a coin flip. The best I can come up with is: xx, xxx, Ax, KQJxxx where its cold, but this is balanced against xxx, Qxx, Qx, KQJxxx where it has little play.

Noble, do you have a low level key card ask for clubs (4♣ / 4♦)?. If not, I will be happy with a natural, forcing 4♣. I don't expect to always reach it when its cold, and I sometimes expect to reach 6 when its less than 50-50. Thats life.

[keylime]

Ditto Phil. Hope you have way of stopping at 4NT if needed.

[Apollo81]

pclayton, on Jan 15 2007, 01:43 PM, said:

I'm having a little trouble coming up with hands where 6♣ is a great spot. Ordinary 3♣ calls with: xx, Kxx, xx, KQJxxx in spite of the perfect majors make it a coin flip. The best I can come up with is: xx, xxx, Ax, KQJxxx where its cold, but this is balanced against xxx, Qxx, Qx, KQJxxx where it has little play.

Noble, do you have a low level key card ask for clubs (4♣ / 4♦)?.  If not, I will be happy with a natural, forcing 4♣. I don't expect to always reach it when its cold, and I sometimes expect to reach 6 when its less than 50-50. Thats life.

What do you consider a max for the inv J/S?

What do you consider a min?

edit: obviously the queens hand is a min

edit: you can bid 4♦ RKC and you have ways to get out in 4NT

[mikeh]

xx Kxx Qx KQ10xxx is a non-maximum on which slam is going to be very good, so I don't think we can sign off here. Keycard, via 4♦, is meaningless: how can we possibly learn what we need to know via keycard?

Bidding 3Major here sounds like a probe for 3N. If he bids 3N over our 3Major, then we can pull to 4♣ to see if we can get a ♦ control out of him, but this may not find the ♦Q for us when he has it, and when he doesn't bid 3N, our auction becomes strained and ambiguous. Note I did not specify which major we bid...because of the question of what options he may have depends to a degree on which major we bid. If we bid 3♥, he is unlikely to be able to bid 3N. If we bid 3♠, 3N may show the ♥K (we like) or the ♥Qxx, Q10, QJx etc... too ambiguous.

So my 'solution' is 4N: presumably this is a near-perfect description: of our general hand type anyway. I think it ought logically to show a balanced hand too good for 1N and not good enough for 2N.

This quantitative bid is far from perfect, but partner has a chance to go right: if he has a maximum with either ♦ cards or lots of controls (in context) he will bid slam. If he has a minimum, he will pass... now, it is possible to construct hands on which 10 tricks are not attainable in notrump, but if that is our worry, then we probably shouldn't ever get out of bed...life is too dangerous for us....

[Winstonm]

I think there is a very good case here for a raise to 4C to be forcing - when partner has made a limited bid it is unlikely that the opposite hand will only be interested in minor-suit game opposite a "top" limit.

This way, a first or second round control could be shown below game if responder held a slam-appropriate hand.

[Poky]

3♠

Natural. Game forcing.

[Apollo81]

pard has xxx x Axx KQxxxx

player holding this hand bid...3NT (ugh)

[pclayton]

Apollo81, on Jan 29 2007, 01:15 PM, said:

pard has xxx x Axx KQxxxx

player holding this hand bid...3NT (ugh)

So slam is about 45%; maybe more if you combine ♠/♦ squeeze chances by playing the spade suit sub-optimally.