[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

P-2NT
3C-(DBL)-3D
5D

---

Should we have reached 6D or is the given bidding ok?

[chicken]

i wld have bid 4♦ (slaminterest) instead. 5♦ is too chicken.

[kenrexford]

P-P-2NT-P-
3♣-X-3♦-P-
4♦-P-4♥(RKCB for diamond, 1430-style)-P-
4♠(1)-P-4NT(Q?)-P-
5♠(Yes, plus this specific King and no other)-P-6♦-PPP

On an aggressive day, Opener might bid 6♣ as a Last Train bid, but Responder would not be interested enough in the grand. Switch to the spade Jack and heart Queen, and the grand makes. Give North the spade Jack. Any number of possibilities.

As an aside, I could imagine getting to a failing grand much more often on these cards than I could imagine languishing in 5♦.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

5D would not have occurred to me,
I would have bid 3NT.
Ok, partner cant hold two diamonds,
how else to explain the double, but
5D is still a long way to go.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kgr]

kenrexford, on Aug 3 2007, 01:10 PM, said:

P-P-2NT-P-
3♣-X-3♦-P-
4♦-P-4♥(RKCB for diamond, 1430-style)-P-
4♠(1)-P-4NT(Q?)-P-
5♠(Yes, plus this specific King and no other)-P-6♦-PPP

Why "5♠(Yes, plus this specific King and no other)" ?
Can't he still have ♣K because 5♣ would say not ♦Q and it is still possible that opener is checking for 5 (without ♦Q) or 6♦ (with ♦Q)?

[kenrexford]

kgr, on Aug 3 2007, 06:36 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Aug 3 2007, 01:10 PM, said:

P-P-2NT-P-
3♣-X-3♦-P-
4♦-P-4♥(RKCB for diamond, 1430-style)-P-
4♠(1)-P-4NT(Q?)-P-
5♠(Yes, plus this specific King and no other)-P-6♦-PPP

Why "5♠(Yes, plus this specific King and no other)" ?
Can't he still have ♣K because 5♣ would say not ♦Q and it is still possible that opener is checking for 5 (without ♦Q) or 6♦ (with ♦Q)?

I suppose you could play that 5♣ says "No Queen," 6♣ as "Yes, plus only this King," and 5♦ as "Yes, but no Kings."

I just do not. I have no problem in theory with your suggestion.

[pbleighton]

Quote

5D would not have occurred to me,
I would have bid 3NT.

Agree.

Peter

[helene_t]

chicken, on Aug 3 2007, 12:46 PM, said:

i wld have bid 4♦ (slaminterest) instead. 5♦ is too chicken.

Agree.

[cherdano]

I play 3♦ over the double as natural, so responder would have a clear slam try.

[keylime]

Ditto Arend.

[mikeh]

I play 20-21 2N, as do most in NA: you did not specify your range. On that basis, the S hand is too strong for 2N: I would have upgraded due to the controls and that great diamond suit. Compare the playing value of the hand to the same high cards but 3=3=4=3 with AK32 in ♦s. You'd still be calling that a maximum due to the controls and the 21 count, but the actual hand is a full trick stronger in playing values opposite most responding hands.

If you opened 2♣, you'd get a waiting response (depends on methods, obviously) and then bid 2N to show 22-23... this hand is close to 23 by my valuation.

Now responder would get more excited.

As it was, North was a little conservative (and much again depends on methods). What inferences were there available to North from partner's 3♦ bid? Obviously no major, but what is the minimum club length and texture for a pass of 3♣? Unless you can answer that, any number of diamonds becomes problematic.

However, I suspect that almost all would assume that opener has at least 3♦s and, if only 3, little wastage in clubs... with a chunky 4 bagger, he'd at least consider the option of offering to play 3♣ x'd. So 'raising' diamonds is logical and the question is whether to offer a shot at slam.

Slam is good opposite weaker hands (the 3=3=4=3 example I mentioned earlier) and we are clearly always going to game, so raising to 4♦ seems obvious, to involve partner.

I truly hate methods that permit opener to bid 4♥ keycard here. It is usually impossible for opener to have any idea what to do based solely on keycard responses (even allowing, as good structures do, for identification of side kings). Opener has zero idea of responder's shape. Plus, when opener holds, say QJx AKx AQxx Axx, this is a hand with some slam interest, and the best way of showing this is to allow a 4♥ cuebid... which keycard removes. The fact that it 'works' on this unusual 2N opening hand is not a reason to adopt it at large.

For me, the auction would be:

2♣ 2♦ positive waiting
2N 3♣ [x]
3♦ 4♦
4♠ 4N nothing to show, but still with mild interest
5♣ 6♦

Note the use of 4N as a 'still interested, no cue available' bid: I have written on this usage before. Keycard, in these auctions, is a crutch.


Except in specific auctions in which responder has shown either a 6+ suit with slam ambitions or a gf+ two suiter, I refuse to play methods that allow the 2N bidder to ask for keycards, and I have NEVER regretted that approach. While I am not claiming my slam bidding is on a par with the world's best, it is not a weak area of my game.

[FrancesHinden]

mikeh, on Aug 3 2007, 05:26 PM, said:

Except in specific auctions in which responder has shown either a 6+ suit with slam ambitions or a gf+ two suiter, I refuse to play methods that allow the 2N bidder to ask for keycards, and I have NEVER regretted that approach. While I am not claiming my slam bidding is on a par with the world's best, it is not a weak area of my game.

What he said.
(possibly apart from the 'not a weak area of my game' bit)

[jdonn]

A good method over auctions like
2NT 3♣
3♦ 4♦
is for the first step (4♥) by south to say "I don't like diamonds", over which responder can bid either 4♠ keycard anyway or 4NT/5♦ to play. Or opener can bid 4♠+ as immediate keycard showing bids if he does like diamonds. This can be applicable to a number of auctions like this, and is a lot less muddy than cuebidding and vague 4NT bids (I'm not saying the previous suggestions of a meaning for 4NT were vague.) So on this hand it would continue
4♠ (I like diamonds, 1 or 4 keycards) 5♣ (4NT is queen ask, next cheapest nontrump bid shows all the keycards and the trump queen)
5♥ (king of hearts) 6♦ (nothing more to contribute)
P (no assurances of there being a grand, though it is possible.)

And yes, south is too good for 2NT Unless it includes 22 in the range.

[kenrexford]

To answer one question raised...

2NT-P-3♣-X-
3♦-P-4♦-P-
???

4♥ = 1430 RKCB
4♠ = 1/4 answer, positive about diamonds
4NT = negative about diamonds
5♣ = 0/3 (obviously 3), positive about diamonds
5♦ = 2 without
5♥ = 2 with

The last two are only in theory.

So, you don't have to get all hostile about who asks and who tells. Opener has plenty of space to decide at the table.

I truly hate methods that forbid opener to bid 4♥ keycard here. LOL

[neilkaz]

kenrexford, on Aug 3 2007, 06:10 AM, said:

P-P-2NT-P-
3♣-X-3♦-P-
4♦-P-4♥(RKCB for diamond, 1430-style)-P-
4♠(1)-P-4NT(Q?)-P-
5♠(Yes, plus this specific King and no other)-P-6♦-PPP

On an aggressive day, Opener might bid 6♣ as a Last Train bid, but Responder would not be interested enough in the grand.  Switch to the spade Jack and heart Queen, and the grand makes.  Give North the spade Jack.  Any number of possibilities.

As an aside, I could imagine getting to a failing grand much more often on these cards than I could imagine languishing in 5♦.

Nice auction, Ken. Kickback sure makes it easier to find minor suit slams. I certainly play 3♦ as natural after PD's takeout oriented double. PD's jump to 5♦ is awfully short sighted with 9 HCP, 5♦, a stiff and a good fit opposite 20-21 HCP. Yes there's a chance of an opening ♣ ruff, but as N you have to show real slam interest of just ask for key cards and bid slam if opener has 4 !

As for the specific king possibilities with the Q ask and noting that this would apply without the opps ♣ bid.

5♦ I don't have the Q (no need to bid 5♣ and let the opps make a lead director when you likely aren't slamming.

5♣ I have Q and at least this this K. 5♥ then asks (although 5♦ cannot be a sign off and could also ask) for more kings and 5♠ shows that K and 5NT shows the K in the ask suit ♥, and 6♣ can show all the missing K's (obviously a grand will be played).

5♥ shows K of H and 5♠ asks for that K in addition and 5NT shows.

Anyhow..resp. is a big wimp for signing off in 5♦ and if I could make only 1 call as N it would be 6♦ right after the 3♦ response.

[kgr]

Thanks all for the answers.
I considered opening 2♣ iso 2NT, but thought that opening 2NT would make the bidding easier in a pick-up partnership. ..but then bidding after 2♣-2♦-2NT would not have been much more difficult

[Impact]

Late to this thread, but regardless of range (and I agree with mikeH's comments that this is around a 23 count)

1. once they double 3C it should make the hand easier;

2. Over the double, most would show hte Major if they had it and pass by the big hand denies real D, XX would be good C, 3D shows real D and denies M.

3. Assuming basic agreements as in 2 above, responder could splinter with 4H over opener's 3D bid, and that should provoke slam over any encouraging noise from opener...after all opposite 23, with a decided fit and distribution he is almost there by himself. Some might play 4H as Kickback (in which case 4NT can be a substitute splinter in H). From responder's point of view his greatest concern is 2 losers off the top so Kickback by responder/avoiding 2 C losers is key and it seems to me he should take control.

4. Albeit unpopular currently, the use of control responses to a 2C opening would make it easy for opener if the auction proceeds in similar fashion with responder then raising opener's 3D 3rd bid to either 4D or 4H (splinter in the latter case)

regards