[pclayton]

Can anyone construct a sensible sequence to 6♠ with this pair:

---

Our auction stalled out at 4♠: 1♠ - 2♥ (GF) - 2♠ - 3♥ - 3♠ - 4♠ - AP.

[pbleighton]

The only thing I can think of is opening 1C in a strong club system (would I do this at the table?). Then 1C-1H-1S-2H-2S-3S-4C-4H-rkc-6S.

Of course, the opps make come in with their 11 card club fit

So no, not really.

Peter

[jdonn]

pclayton, on May 3 2007, 11:33 AM, said:

Can anyone construct a sensible sequence to 6♠ with this pair:

Dealer: ????? Vul: ???? Scoring: Unknown

♠ ATxxxxx ♥ x ♦ AQxxx ♣   ♠ KQ ♥ AK9xxx ♦ JTx ♣ Qx

Our auction stalled out at 4♠: 1♠ - 2♥ (GF) - 2♠ - 3♥ - 3♠ - 4♠ - AP.

As I mentioned before I edited my post (I originally misread the auction) I think opener should rebid 3♦, not 3♠. My full auction to get to slam would be

1♠ 2♥
3♦ 3♥
3♠ 4♣

I play 4♣ (bidding 4th suit opposite partner rebidding his suit in GF auction) as an artificial 'good' 4♠ raise. Responder knows he has some wasted cards so it's close and I wouldn't fault him for not doing it, but KQ of spades are so huge he might come through. Then opener will surely push to slam, maybe like this

4♦ 4♥
5♣ 5♥
6♠

[mike777]

1s=2h
3d=3h
3s=4s
5c=5h
5s=? Should east move on with KQ of spades? She knows West is looking for something outside of hearts or clubs. West has made a slam try missing the KQ of of spades.

[cherdano]

jdonn, on May 3 2007, 10:57 AM, said:

pclayton, on May 3 2007, 11:33 AM, said:

Can anyone construct a sensible sequence to 6♠ with this pair:
(...)

Our auction stalled out at 4♠: 1♠ - 2♥ (GF) - 2♠ - 3♥ - 3♠ - 4♠ - AP.

As I mentioned before I edited my post (I originally misread the auction) I think opener should rebid 3♦, not 3♠. My full auction to get to slam would be

1♠ 2♥
3♦ 3♥
3♠ 4♣

I play 4♣ (bidding 4th suit opposite partner rebidding his suit in GF auction) as an artificial 'good' 4♠ raise. Responder knows he has some wasted cards so it's close and I wouldn't fault him for not doing it, but KQ of spades are so huge he might come through. Then opener will surely push to slam, maybe like this

4♦ 4♥
5♣ 5♥
6♠

I strongly agree with 3♦ but saw no path over 3♠, lacking this nice agreement. (And yes, 3♦ shows extras of course, but if two kings give you a reasonable slam...)

[jdonn]

cherdano, on May 3 2007, 12:43 PM, said:

I strongly agree with 3♦ but saw no path over 3♠, lacking this nice agreement. (And yes, 3♦ shows extras of course, but if two kings give you a reasonable slam...)

It's really a sweet agreement, it applies in any game forcing auction where a player is rebidding a suit and two other suits have been bid, and there is no room to support partner below game, then bidding the 4th suit (which you can hardly want to do naturally) shows a good raise. This is good because on many of these auctions you may even be stuck raising partner with a singleton sometimes, so he has to know the difference.

1♠ 2♥ 3♣ 3♥ 4♦ might be 5215 with 17
1♠ 1NT 3♦ 3♥ 4♣ might be 5341 with 20

and so on. It can also apply on the 3 level in spades if the suit is hearts.

1♥ 2♦ 2♥ 3♣ 3♥ 3♠

And so on.

Like take Mike's example auction above. I can see opener bidding over 4♠ maybe, but if using my agreement he would have an easy pass and never have to risk the 5 level.

[whereagles]

I don't think I could reach 6♠ without taking some rosy views of life ^^

[inquiry]

[MISIRY ALERT]

This clearly isn't part of 2/1 or SAYC, but I might as well show the misiry auction.
I would probably be in 6♦.

3♦-3♥
3♠-4♣
4♥-6♦
Pass

3D = h preempt, or diamond and black suit strong
3H = i don't believe for a minute you have a H preempt
3S = 5+S, 5+D, exactly "four" losers
4C = no control in clubs, looking for possible slam
4H = only heart ACE is useful
6D = SKQ cover 2 losers, HA covers one loser.

I might get to 6S or 6D by this auction
3♦-4♥ (if you have strong hand you will bid over 4H
4♠-5♥ (not to play 5♥, if you want to insist on hearts you bid 3NT over 3D
6♦ - pass 6♦ ACE of hearts works, i am missing spade queen

[/END MISIRY ALERT]

[Winstonm]

1S-2H
3D-3S
4D-4H
4S-5S
6S

Maybe.

[lowerline]

1♠ 2♥
3♦ 3♠
4♣(1) 4♥(1)
5♣(1) 6♠
1: cue

5♣ looks like a void, otherwise he probably would have bid 4NT (RKCB). With ♠KQ and ♥AK six must be reasonable at least.

Steven

[Fluffy]

The best way I see is starting like this:

1♠-2♥
2♠-2NT

Now you have a chance, 3♥ gets rid of too much space.

[Gerben42]

Sorry but the 2♠ rebid was insane. 3♦ is obvious.

[Echognome]

Gerben42, on May 4 2007, 03:39 AM, said:

Sorry but the 2♠ rebid was insane. 3♦ is obvious.

I don't understand this comment. I don't know Phil's methods, but what if 3♦ shows extras and their style is to first limit their hand with 2♠ hoping to be able to bid and rebid diamonds later?

Perhaps a comment such as "If you have to bid 2♠ under your methods, then you might rethink them as you will encounter problems such as you found here."

But to say that it's "insane" without considering what a 3♦ rebid shows in their methods is unfair.

I will only recommend that 2/1 auctions might flow smoother if you build in a chance for one of the hands to get out of the way of the other, in particular you want to let the more distributional hands describe (which may be difficult if both are distributional). I would preferably like to play where responder is able to bid the next step as a relay after opener's rebid, but even agreeing a 2NT call as ART may be useful. Then if responder chooses a different action, responder's hand is better clarified as well. Given that responder has already shown 5+♥, it seems best for responder to get out of opener's way and let him describe, especially when he is able to play in multiple strains.

Anyway, probably a useful area to discuss with your regular partners.

[jdonn]

Insane is too strong, but suffice to say when you are 7-5, you have extras.

[pclayton]

Echognome, on May 4 2007, 08:18 AM, said:

Gerben42, on May 4 2007, 03:39 AM, said:

Sorry but the 2♠ rebid was insane. 3♦ is obvious.

I don't understand this comment. I don't know Phil's methods, but what if 3♦ shows extras and their style is to first limit their hand with 2♠ hoping to be able to bid and rebid diamonds later?

Perhaps a comment such as "If you have to bid 2♠ under your methods, then you might rethink them as you will encounter problems such as you found here."

But to say that it's "insane" without considering what a 3♦ rebid shows in their methods is unfair.

I will only recommend that 2/1 auctions might flow smoother if you build in a chance for one of the hands to get out of the way of the other, in particular you want to let the more distributional hands describe (which may be difficult if both are distributional). I would preferably like to play where responder is able to bid the next step as a relay after opener's rebid, but even agreeing a 2NT call as ART may be useful. Then if responder chooses a different action, responder's hand is better clarified as well. Given that responder has already shown 5+♥, it seems best for responder to get out of opener's way and let him describe, especially when he is able to play in multiple strains.

Anyway, probably a useful area to discuss with your regular partners.

3♦ does show extras and 2♠ is a catchall. While the 7-5 is nice, its not a great hand if pard doesn't fit one of our suits.

The best thing about 3♦ is that it makes 3♠ more efficient.

I held the spades here. What I was planning on was to rebid 4♦ over 3N, if pard were to choose that over 3♠, which seemed likely with my club void. Looking back on my older thread on 2/1 sequences, I think Fred suggests 4♦ as a self-cue however.

I think getting to 6 is tougher than everyone is making it out to be. The ♦J is a huge card. Without that card, slam is anti%. How can we possibly know this?

I think the opponents silence with 11 clubs doesn't help us much either, since I'm playing pard for a little duplication, although not a lot since pard didn't rebid 3N.

[pclayton]

Quote

I will only recommend that 2/1 auctions might flow smoother if you build in a chance for one of the hands to get out of the way of the other, in particular you want to let the more distributional hands describe (which may be difficult if both are distributional). I would preferably like to play where responder is able to bid the next step as a relay after opener's rebid, but even agreeing a 2NT call as ART may be useful.

This is an interesting idea. 2N can be artificial in some instances, I think. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to 'plan' a 4♦ rebid after pard's 2N?

[cherdano]

pclayton, on May 4 2007, 10:37 AM, said:

3♦ does show extras and 2♠ is a catchall. While the 7-5 is nice, its not a great hand if pard doesn't fit one of our suits.

The best thing about 3♦ is that it makes 3♠ more efficient.

I held the spades here. What I was planning on was to rebid 4♦ over 3N, if pard were to choose that over 3♠, which seemed likely with my club void. Looking back on my older thread on 2/1 sequences, I think Fred suggests 4♦ as a self-cue however.

I think getting to 6 is tougher than everyone is making it out to be. The ♦J is a huge card. Without that card, slam is anti%. How can we possibly know this?

I think the opponents silence with 11 clubs doesn't help us much either, since I'm playing pard for a little duplication, although not a lot since pard didn't rebid 3N.

1. I don't think with 7-5 you can wait until you have proof of a fit.

2. Even if 4♦ over partner's 3N is natural, it hardly shows a 5-card suit.

3. I am not sure it is tougher than we are making it, except for the usual amount of double-dummy bidding. I said I saw no way to get there, after all

4. The J in partner's 5-card suit is almost always always a huge card.

[cherdano]

pclayton, on May 4 2007, 10:40 AM, said:

Quote

I will only recommend that 2/1 auctions might flow smoother if you build in a chance for one of the hands to get out of the way of the other, in particular you want to let the more distributional hands describe (which may be difficult if both are distributional). I would preferably like to play where responder is able to bid the next step as a relay after opener's rebid, but even agreeing a 2NT call as ART may be useful.

This is an interesting idea. 2N can be artificial in some instances, I think. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to 'plan' a 4♦ rebid after pard's 2N?

Maybe it is playable, but I would hate to play an artificial 2N. A 2N rebid seems both a frequent and necessary hand-type to show.