[kenrexford]

I HATE THIS BID AND DEFINITION!!!

I feel somewhat strongly about this.

If partner has ♠A, ♥A, ♦KQ, a "minimum," we make 6♠.
If partner has ♠A, ♥QJ, ♦Q, ♣KQJ, a "maximum," we may get a diamond lead and then not even make 4♠.

And you want me to do something intelligent here, at this point?

Parameters, parameters, parameters, please.

[keylime]

Justin,

With the given restraints, there are certain bids that wouldn't work very well:

1. 5S = well you're staring at good trumps so that doesn't work
2. 4S = giving up on a possible slam
3. 4NT = what's 4NT, RKC? quant?
4. 4H = why are we lying about our major lengths?

I vote for the least damaging bid: 4D. Call it the "all purpose forward going bid". It gives just enough space for responder to do the right thing.

[jtfanclub]

I'm still not an expert, but...

Given a choice between one sequence that may get us to the right contract where partner and I will clearly understand each other, and another auction that may get us to the right contract where it's not clear what the hell the bids mean, well, if it's not just for practice....

4♠. If partner's going to interpret 4♦ as natural instead of being a control bid, I can see this auction going into all sorts of confusing places where I'm not altogether sure that we can get out alive.

[awm]

I'll try 4♦. I suspect that most of the time partner will "correct" this to 4♠ allowing me to bid keycard next.

If partner cuebids 4♥ over my diamond call, I can try 4NT next. This may well be keycard for diamonds, but the ♦KQ are pretty useful cards in an eventual slam contract anyway, and partner will hopefully realize when I bash 6♠ over his keycard response that this is to play.

If partner bids 5♣ or 5♦ I can always try 5♠, which should probably show this hand.

[ralph23]

Jlall, on Aug 6 2007, 03:58 PM, said:

You open 1S, partner bids 3N and says "4333 with 13-15."

And was that actually your agreement?

That strikes me as a pretty detailed agreement for a first-time partnership to have... a specific 4-3-3-3 with 13-15 ... we play 13-15 with 3 trumps but the other suit distributions are not defined in our agreement.

(NB - Does he actually mean by "4333" that he holds *4♠*, of all things? Or just any flat hand with 13-15? Or just any flat hand with 13-15, Except not holding 4 spades?)

This post has been edited by ralph23: 2007-August-06, 16:18

[jtfanclub]

awm, on Aug 6 2007, 04:49 PM, said:

If partner cuebids 4♥ over my diamond call, I can try 4NT next.

Are you sure he'll take this as Blackwood, and not to play?

[cherdano]

I would have bid 4♠. This is a double shot, if partner understands the bid the way I would (if I played this), he can't have many controls, and no slam will be good. When he doesn't, the odds are still against making a slam (I would guess the odds are 50-50 that partner holds two aces), and since I won't be able to make a delicate investigation...

ralph23, on Aug 6 2007, 03:56 PM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 6 2007, 03:58 PM, said:

You open 1S, partner bids 3N and says "4333 with 13-15."

And was that actually your agreement?

That strikes me as a pretty detailed agreement for a first-time partnership to have... a specific 4-3-3-3 with 13-15 ... we play 13-15 with 3 trumps but the other suit distributions are not defined in our agreement.

It was just a match between friends, two almost first-time partnerships at this table.

[mike777]

Jlall, on Aug 6 2007, 03:58 PM, said:

First time partner, you have no inferences other than that he is certainly a world class card player but generally not as world class in the bidding.

You hold KQJT9xx Kx Axx x. You are playing a team game.

You open 1S, partner bids 3N and says "4333 with 13-15."

You do not know if 5C asks for aces, you are sure that 4x will be construed as natural.

What's your call?

4nt

No problem yet.

[sathyab]

kenrexford, on Aug 6 2007, 04:15 PM, said:

I HATE THIS BID AND DEFINITION!!!

I feel somewhat strongly about this.

If partner has ♠A, ♥A, ♦KQ, a "minimum," we make 6♠.
If partner has ♠A, ♥QJ, ♦Q, ♣KQJ, a "maximum," we may get a diamond lead and then not even make 4♠.

And you want me to do something intelligent here, at this point?

Parameters, parameters, parameters, please.

There're a lot of hands for partner that don't include the Ace of Spades that offer a good play for 6s. Old-fashioned bids like this are typically based on a lot of stuff outside and expect to make 9 tricks if you have a balanced opener yourself. My vote is for 6s, bid what you think you can make. Also it has the virtue of getting the hand/rubber over with quickly no matter what the result.

[mikeh]

I will bid 4♦.

It seems to me that he cannot bid 5♦, the only call that really threatens to foul us up (altho I'd bid 5♠ next).

If he 'likes' his hand for either of my suits, he will have to bid 4♥ if he holds that A... and now I will bid 5♥, and surely he will correct to 5♠ if lacking 2 Aces, and will bid on with 2 Aces. I don't think I can logically be off two club tricks on this sequence, altho maybe I'm guilty of allowing my intended meaning to persuade me that this is what my auction shows

It's tough but not impossible to come up with a hand with no 5 level safety, but slam is too probable to worry about it.

If he lacks the ♥ Ace but has the black aces and likes either of my suits, he should be able to bid 5♣. Basically, I am going to slam over that, since I really can't sign off once he likes his hand.

With a soft hand and only 1 Ace (or none!) he will/surely must bid 4♠... and I will be happy I didn't have 5♣ available (altho surely anyone close to WC would take 5♣ as ace asking.. but is it keycard?...I think it is...but there's another reason not to do it)

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Aug 6 2007, 04:16 PM, said:

Ken please I don't care how bad it is this is what happened and you have to find a bid in order to win the match. I gave you parameters, you have to accept that they're bad and try and make the best possible bid.

Obv if I was playing with you it would go 1S-2C and then we would end up cuebidding for 6 levels and knowing exactly where we should be but unfortunately thats not the case here

That's a fair point. You sometimes get stuck in this scenario, and you cannot elect to abstain at the table.

Obviously, technique is impossible. One could argue that a 4♦ call has a lot of merit. Partner will assess his cards somewhat right, presumably. Hopefully, he will bid 4♠ or 6♦ as his next call. If the later, I can correct to 6♠ and expect a likely make. I'd expect him to have four of the five key cards that I want -- ♠A, ♥A, ♣A, ♦K, and ♦Q.

If he does something weird over 4♦, I'll have to field this. After 4♥, I'll sign off at 4♠. If he has four of the five keys, I cannot imagine him passing this. More likely, 4♥ (if not KeyCard for diamonds -- is it?) will show some tenuous interest, which I expect to be the club King instead of something else or three keys but I hit the 4-card suit. I'm not interested in that.

If he trots out 4NT, I'm blasting to 6♠. I ain't answering, getting into some sick hesitation committee B.S., and all that.

If I hear 5♣, I'm guessing that he's being creative and showing the club King. I'll sign off at 5♠.

I'm not bothering with any other weird calls.

[keylime]

Justin,

Since you're staring at a 1 loser suit, making a trump asking bid is rather futile. :-)

[han]

I also like 4D best, second choice 5S (invitational to 6, not an asking bid).

[Halo]

4NT

If partner has 2/3 controls I'll take a shot at 6S. I'd prefer if he had two controls this time.

[Rossoneri]

Jlall, on Aug 7 2007, 05:48 AM, said:

keylime, on Aug 6 2007, 04:28 PM, said:

1. 5S = well you're staring at good trumps so that doesn't work

??

Partner will probably pass with Axx, that's what he means.

[helene_t]

I'll sign off in 4♠, I think the 6 has slightly less than 50% chance and that there's no way to find out.

[FrancesHinden]

As 3NT is ostensibly to play, 4NT sounds quantitative to me.

I believe that partner should not have a massively control-rich or slam-suitable hand for this sort of call, but I might not know.

However, it doesn't take much to make a slam:

Axx
xxx
KQxx
Axx

needs the HA onside or diamonds 3-3

while

xxx
QJx
KJx
KQJx

is more in line with my thinking of what a 3NT bid should look like, and we aren't making at the 5 level.

I would just bid 4S. I know this is pessimistic, but I'm gambling on partner positively selecting 3NT as a descriptive call, rather than counting his points and his shape and not looking at this suitability for suit play/NT play.