[DWM]

Scoring: IMP

---

Playing 2/1 15-17 NT Partner Opens 1NT

You choose to transfer into ♥.

Partner super accepts showing 17 points 4 ♥ and no outside good 4 card suit.

How do you continue?

Would start with transfer or 3♥ (slam try). For note we do not play any transefers at the 4 level.

[Fluffy]

2♦ is good because it lets you splinter

now 3♠ looks like it

[jdonn]

I would simply bid keycard now. There are 3 reasons.

1) Slam will be good the vast majority of the time that we aren't off 2 aces.

2) The rest of the time they will probably have to make the right lead to set me, and I refuse to help them.

3) It is possible it matters where partner's cards are, but pretty unlikely. For example KQJ of spades AQ of clubs is essentially equivalent to the reverse.

If I were going to declare I might even just bid 6♥ so they can't draw an inference from doubling/not doubling a keycard response, but since partner is declaring the potential doubler is on lead, so I might as well make sure we aren't off 2 aces.

[Apollo81]

RKC

[jillybean]

3♠

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Mar 14 2007, 03:30 PM, said:

I would simply bid keycard now. There are 3 reasons.

1) Slam will be good the vast majority of the time that we aren't off 2 aces.

2) The rest of the time they will probably have to make the right lead to set me, and I refuse to help them.

3) It is possible it matters where partner's cards are, but pretty unlikely. For example KQJ of spades AQ of clubs is essentially equivalent to the reverse.

If I were going to declare I might even just bid 6♥ so they can't draw an inference from doubling/not doubling a keycard response, but since partner is declaring the potential doubler is on lead, so I might as well make sure we aren't off 2 aces.

Ditto

[the hog]

pclayton, on Mar 15 2007, 07:52 AM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 14 2007, 03:30 PM, said:

I would simply bid keycard now. There are 3 reasons.

1) Slam will be good the vast majority of the time that we aren't off 2 aces.

2) The rest of the time they will probably have to make the right lead to set me, and I refuse to help them.

3) It is possible it matters where partner's cards are, but pretty unlikely. For example KQJ of spades AQ of clubs is essentially equivalent to the reverse.

If I were going to declare I might even just bid 6♥ so they can't draw an inference from doubling/not doubling a keycard response, but since partner is declaring the potential doubler is on lead, so I might as well make sure we aren't off 2 aces.

Ditto

Just as a matter of interest Phil and Josh....what do you play as KC here? Do you play 4N as quantitative or KC. If the former, do you play 4S as Kickback?

[han]

4NT quant after you have just found a 9-card fit and partner has shown a 17-count?

I like RKC, I use 4NT for it.

[kenrexford]

It would be nice to know if partner has the right or wrong hand.

♠KQJ ♥Qxxx ♦QJx ♣KQJ would be really unfortunate. 4NT gets us too high.

My concern with blasting is that we might be set one or two tricks on Aces alone.

My concern with 4NT is that we actually might be too high, and because I want to protect the diamond King. My bid of 3♥ protects that concern, and it allows flexibility to consider 6NT if clubs seem in jeopardy (switch declarer's back).

I hear the non-disclosure idea, but the definition of what the super-accept shows troubles me. These other concerns seem more pressing. I'm not so sure that a cue or two would disclose too much.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Mar 14 2007, 09:35 PM, said:

It would be nice to know if partner has the right or wrong hand.

♠KQJ ♥Qxxx ♦QJx ♣KQJ would be really unfortunate. 4NT gets us too high.

My concern with blasting is that we might be set one or two tricks on Aces alone.

My concern with 4NT is that we actually might be too high, and because I want to protect the diamond King. My bid of 3♥ protects that concern, and it allows flexibility to consider 6NT if clubs seem in jeopardy (switch declarer's back).

I hear the non-disclosure idea, but the definition of what the super-accept shows troubles me. These other concerns seem more pressing. I'm not so sure that a cue or two would disclose too much.

Aren't you being just a HAIR too literal? Do you think anyone better than a novice would superaccept with that just because it has 17 points?

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Mar 14 2007, 08:55 PM, said:

Just as a matter of interest Phil and Josh....what do you play as KC here? Do you play 4N as quantitative or KC. If the former, do you play 4S as Kickback?

I believe it is 'expert standard' that even 3NT here is not natural, just a slam try. So certainly 4NT is not natural.

[keylime]

I KC here with 3S, Turbo start with denial cues. What concerns me is a hand like AQJx Qxxx AKx Jx where we're dead off the hop potentially.

[HeartA]

Hannie, on Mar 14 2007, 09:10 PM, said:

4NT quant after you have just found a 9-card fit and partner has shown a 17-count?

I like RKC, I use 4NT for it.

ditto. Over 9+ card fits, no more quantitative.

[DWM]

Problem we faced on this hand was Opener had 2+ Q♥ and club to the AK did not help the chances of making.

What are the continuations after KC here with 3S, Turbo start with denial cues? I assume steps for 03, 14, (or 14, 30), 2 W/O, 2 with but what is the Turbo start bit?

[Codo]

I accept a blast to slam (via KC or not) as a fair gambling which sometimes works.
I had used a slower route with Control showing bids for 4 H + 1.

[FrancesHinden]

To be honest, unless the opponents are vul and we are non-vul, I would have responded 4H to 1NT (you said we aren't playing 4-level transfers).

I'm more interested in playing the contract in 4H rather than defending a spade contract that I am in bidding a miracle slam.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3NT, showing slam interest, asking
for cue bids.
We had this discussion before, if 3NT
could be an offer to play knowing about
a 5-4 fit.
There are hands, you would like to suggest
3NT and hands you would like to have
a forward going bid available.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

jdonn, on Mar 14 2007, 11:32 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Mar 14 2007, 09:35 PM, said:

It would be nice to know if partner has the right or wrong hand.

♠KQJ ♥Qxxx ♦QJx ♣KQJ  would be really unfortunate.  4NT gets us too high.

My concern with blasting is that we might be set one or two tricks on Aces alone.

My concern with 4NT is that we actually might be too high, and because I want to protect the diamond King.  My bid of 3♥ protects that concern, and it allows flexibility to consider 6NT if clubs seem in jeopardy (switch declarer's back).

I hear the non-disclosure idea, but the definition of what the super-accept shows troubles me.  These other concerns seem more pressing.  I'm not so sure that a cue or two would disclose too much.

Aren't you being just a HAIR too literal? Do you think anyone better than a novice would superaccept with that just because it has 17 points?

I am not saying I would supper accept,
... but I would say it depends on agreement?
One option would be a 2NT supper accept,
showing 4-3-3-3 with 17HCP.
If you play this agreement, than thats what you
hold.

You could downgrade of course, and maybe you
should, but the knowlede of the 9 card fit is certainly
a point to upgrade.

With kind regards
Marlowe