[jmc]

Scoring: IMP

---

Partner and I are playing Precision and have the following auction with no interference:

1C-2D-2H-2NT-3H-4C-5C-5H-6C-6D-6H-all pass

1C is 16+ forcing, artificial
2D shows 5 or more H, 8 or more points and is a game force
2H implies a H fit and asks controls
2NT shows 3 controls
3H asks about the H suit
4C shows 2 top honors in a 5-card suit
5C asks controls in C
5H shows 3rd round control in C
6C asks shortness or length
6D shows shortness, doubleton

I have two questions.

1. What is the best line of play for 12 tricks on a D lead?
2. Should I have looked harder for a grand? I could have asked about spade controls etc.

My thought at the time was that with only a 5-3 trump fit, the grand would need a 3-2 break in H and a 3-3 club break.

Any thoughts appreciated.

jmc

[jtfanclub]

jmc, on Aug 15 2007, 11:47 AM, said:

2. Should I have looked harder for a grand? I could have asked about spade controls etc.

You just found a 28 hcp slam.

In my humble world, when you find a slam with fewer than 30 hcp, you just take the small even if the grand is 80%. So many people will end up in game that the advantage in IMPs isn't worth it.

Suppose the field is in game.

Making a small slam is +13. Making a grand is +17. Going down 1 in a grand is -13.

So bidding the grand is worth +4 when it works, -26 when it fails. Just isn't worth it.

[jdonn]

jmc, on Aug 15 2007, 11:47 AM, said:

1. What is the best line of play for 6 tricks on a D lead?

Probably taking the 4 aces then black suit kings, then throwing your hand away.

[kenrexford]

The question of whether to pursue the grand seems to be conditioned upon the tools available, not the hand actually occurring.

If I read this correctly, I think that you had the following information available, so far:

1. Partner has KQxxx in hearts, but the possession of the Jack is still unknown
2. Partner has the diamond Ace, but he does not have the diamond King. The diamond length is unknown.
3. Partner has a doubleton club, apparently not Qx.
4. Partner could have anything in spades.

Thus, it appears that partner may have KQJxx in hearts and the Q-J in spades, right? If he has, for example, ♠QJ ♥KQJxx ♦Axxx ♣xx, or something like that, then it appears that 6NT is ice-cold, and 7♥ only fails if a first-round ruff occurs, or if two stiff diamonds are in this deal, or if hearts are split 5-0, and the last two are not necessarily fatal.

This is not a "28 HCP slam" in the auction; it only turns out to be a 28 HCP slam when Responder's hand is known. Responder could have the spade QJ, diamond QJ, heart J, and club J additional, 8 additional HCP's, such that this might be a 36 HCP slam, for all you know.

The question, it seems to me, is whether you have the tools to check on the spade holding. Your asking bid structure sure took up a lot of space at a few points. The jump from 2NT to 3♥ burned up a lot of space, as did the jump from 4♣ to 5♣. These asking bid sequences seem to do that when you need lots of quacks/body on hands.

I do not know whether your asking-bid style would have allowed a more economical structuring of this sequence, to gain the space necessary to ask about clubs AND about spades. A lack of that option would seem to be a structural defect. You may want to think about that.

[kenrexford]

Just as a thought experiment, I wonder how this sequence would go with natural bidding if the grand was lay-down.

I imagine Responder with a more interesting QJxx-KQJxx-Ax-xx, which seems possible in your actual sequence.

1♣-P-1♥ is the clear start.
Opener might go passive and bid a simple 1♠. If so, Responder will bid 2♦, forcing to game. Opener can bid 2♥, and Responder can agree spades (2♠). This, of course, moots out the heart Jack as all that important.

The sequence that would develop would allow Responder to know that Opener has the A-K of trumps, a stiff in diamonds, the heart Ace, and the A-K in clubs. So, if there also is a spade fit, the grand is VERY easy to bid.

Or, what if Opener jumps to 4♦ after the 2♦ call, played as a splinter and patterning out? Same easy grand slam.

What if responder does not have four spades? It still seems that the grand will be reached, because Opener will know more about Responder's hand.

Well, now! It sure seems strange that the question "To Grand or Not to Grand" is very easily resolved playing a natural system with tools but seems to be extremely difficult with the precision-style greek-letter asking-bid structure. rotflol

[jmc]

There is no doubt I probably failed to use the asks as efficiently as possible. We really don't have a way to ask for jacks in this system. I asked about controls and then the H suit planning to ask about the club situation. That may not have been the best order.

jmc

[kenrexford]

jmc, on Aug 15 2007, 04:32 PM, said:

There is no doubt I probably failed to use the asks as efficiently as possible. We really don't have a way to ask for jacks in this system. I asked about controls and then the H suit planning to ask about the club situation. That may not have been the best order.

jmc

Even if there is a technique for asking all the questions you may need to ask, it still seems counter-productive, at least with this hand, to have the side with primes asking about tertiaries.

I mean, look at a simple alternative sequence, possibly not allowed systemically, but for illustrative purposes.

Suppose Opener were able to jump to 4♦ after the positive heart response of 2♦ to show heart support and a stiff in diamonds, especially if limited to primes.

Suppose, for sake of argument, that 4♠ were Kickback. Opener would show the three Aces. 5♠ could ask for specific Kings, 5NT showing the spade King. 6♣ then could ask for the club King, if Responder had held the golden QJxx-KQJxx-Ax-xx hand, right?

When an auction to 7♥ is easy with Responder askign questions but painful if pener asks questions, then a systemic structure that forces a Q&A session like this is doomed for troubles, IMO. That's my main gripe with precision. I found, when using a strong club system, that all the asking bids in the world were of little use, as I was often running rapidly out of space. More natural approaches, with a back-and-forth cue structure, seems more flexible and more space-conserving.

All that said, I'm trying to remember my asking bids to see if the actual auction could be improved.

Certainly the start is simple. 2♥ asking cost nothing, 2NT response.

Space is saved if the next ask is 3♣, and the apparent response would be two steps up -- 3♥ -- tertiary control. Now, the next logical question would be spades (3♠), and, when relevant (Responder has the spade Queen), the answer would be two steps up, or 4♣.

Opener now knows very little, it seems, as the exact nature of the club and spade holdings is unknown. How does know that Responder has the Ace of diamonds, but the red king holding is unknown, as well as the heart Queen. Seems flawed.

So, back up. After 2NT, suppose again 3♥, with the response of 4♣. Now, maybe some space is saved by bidding 4♠? The answer, when relevant, would apparently be 5♣, tertiary control. 5♠ apparently asks again, the answer being 6♣ when relevant -- the Queen.

This auction still runs out of steam too quickly.

How on earth is this resolved?

[kenrexford]

Played some golf. Got a chance to think this one over more.

OK. You seem to have the right idea, using transfer positives, as these gain some space. However, as you know, the heart suit is the monkey suit, the one with the worst handling problem. Strangely, the same achilles heel that modern 2♣ natural openers have after the 2♦ GF response and after the double negative and with a positive heart hand.

Strange that hearts always are a problem with super-strong hand auctions.

Anyway, the asking bid structure caused problems that I cannot figure out. This seems insane, as I have long believed that the pair who agrees trumps and GF at the two-level wins. Why this anomaly?

I thought through the alternative of a simple cuebidding sequence here, which works a lot better.

1♣-P-2♦!-P-2♥ (agrees hearts, let's start cuebidding)

Now what, when the grand makes (Responder has the same pattern, but with the Q-J in spades)?

R: 3♦ (no black-suit controls, two top heart honors, and a diamond control
O: 3♥ (the partnership has all three top heart honors, plus Opener has control of both black suits and at least one first-round control in a black suit)

Notice that Responder can now cue the spade Queen (3♠) or the club Queen (4♣) or both (3♠-P-3NT-P-4♣), all below 4♥. As his answer to RKCB would be pre-determined, he can even do better. After 4♦ by Opener, Responder can cue the spade Jack (4♠), the club Jack (5♣) or both (4♠-P-4NT-P-5♣), all below 5♥.

I suppose Opener could check on minor-suit 10's, but that seems just plain silly.

[cherdano]

I haven't read all of Ken's posts but I seem to agree with them. This hand has too much to ask, it would be much more useful if it could show all its controls.

[jmc]

I didn't have to accept the transfer. I can also just bid my own suit and then support which will lead to normal cue bids etc. I decided not to do that. It was likely a mistake by me.

I am reading Ken's cue bidding book and it has lots of good ideas. I've been thinking about how to add them to Precision.

So what is the best line for 6?

jmc

[TylerE]

Given the hand QJxx-KQJxx-Ax-xx, in my Precision (transfers, relay control asks)

1c-2d
2h (trump ask) - 3c (2 of top 3, 5 pieces)
3d (clubs?) - 3s (3rd round)
4c (diamonds?) - 4N (1st round)
5c (spades?) - 5h (3rd round)
5s (club reask) - 5N (shortness)
6d (spade reask) - 6s (high card) (Responder would bid 6h with a doubleton spade here. 6N should be safe.)

[Foxx]

jmc, on Aug 15 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

1.  What is the best line of play for 12 tricks on a D lead?

♦A; diamond ruff; ♠A; ♠K (pitch diamond); spade ruff; diamond ruff; ♣A; ♣K; club ruff in dummy HIGH; diamond ruff; then a spade ruff as cheaply as possible to cover LHO. Unless LHO started with five clubs or a doubleton diamond, this will always produce twelve tricks.

[pclayton]

Jonathan - I hope you have two ways to proceed with support after 1♣ - positive suit response.

One way is to accept the transfer. You appear to play these like I do where accepting initiates a series of asking bids and responses. These are great for finding about Aces, Kings, shortness, and trump holdings.

The other way is to agree trump without accepting the transfer. We played a 3♥ call in the given auction did just that. Instead of asking bids, responses, asking bids, responses, the sequence becomes more like a 2/1 GF auction - cooperative. Either hand can seize control, or maintain the auction as cooperative. If responder had a stronger hand with better queens / jacks, this would be a good approach.

Another idea is to play a positive or transfer positive as a 'real hand' (12+) and 1♥ as a generic 8-11 semi-positive. This way, Opener has a much better idea of responder's holdings and can evaluate for game / slam immediately.

[cherdano]

Foxx, on Aug 16 2007, 03:13 PM, said:

jmc, on Aug 15 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

1.  What is the best line of play for 12 tricks on a D lead?

♦A; diamond ruff; ♠A; ♠K (pitch diamond); spade ruff; diamond ruff; ♣A; ♣K; club ruff in dummy HIGH; diamond ruff; then a spade ruff as cheaply as possible to cover LHO. Unless LHO started with five clubs or a doubleton diamond, this will always produce twelve tricks.

This looks very good, I missed the idea of ruffing 3 diamonds.

[kenrexford]

TylerE, on Aug 16 2007, 01:00 PM, said:

Given the hand QJxx-KQJxx-Ax-xx, in my Precision (transfers, relay control asks)

1c-2d
2h (trump ask) - 3c (2 of top 3, 5 pieces)
3d (clubs?) - 3s (3rd round)
4c (diamonds?) - 4N (1st round)
5c (spades?) - 5h (3rd round)
5s (club reask) - 5N (shortness)
6d (spade reask) - 6s (high card) (Responder would bid 6h with a doubleton spade here. 6N should be safe.)

It seems that you will have found the grand opposite Qxx-KQxxx-Axx-xx. Of course, you won't find out about the spade Jack, but few can.

The problem that I see is that partner's bid of 4NT bypassed 4♥ and could have been based upon the hand xxx-KQxxx-Axx-xx, which seems safe. However, if I am assuming the system correctly, he would have bid 4♠ with a slightly lesser xxx-KQxxx-Kxx-xx, right? This would cause some problems, it seems, as the five-level is not now safe.

Even worse might be a troubling hand like QJx-KQxxx-xxx-xx. That hand will provide the same answers but will bid 4♦ in response to 4♣, with slam pretty icy. Comparing that with xxx-KQxxx-QJx-xx, and the auction starts crumbling further.

It just does not seem to work, this asking-bid structure, relay or not. The structure requires a step or more to ask a question, and a step or more to provide an answer, with only one suit the source of discussion, and often another round of Q&A is needed to follow up, in this case in two suits.

Contrasting that is cuebidding, where every call carries compound messages, maximizing efficiency. After a 2♥ call from Opener simply setting trumps, for instance, Responder bids 3♦. There are two ways to look at this start. One is simply definitional, but look at it from an "asking bid" analysis.

3♦ actually answered four simultaneous "asking bids." 2♥ "asked" four questions:

1. A spade control ask, with Responder denying first or second round control (he bypassed 2S)
2. A trump ask, with Responder showing two of the top three hearts (he bypassed 2NT)
3. A club control ask, with Responder denying first or second round control (he bypassed 3♣)
4. A diamond control ask, with Responder showing first or second round control.

This 3♦ also served another compound purpose. Not only did Responder provide an answer to Opener's compound "question," but it simultaneously operated as an asking bid itself:

1. It operated as a trump ask, Opener confirming the third top trump (Opener bid 3♥, the first step)
2. That one step up also allowed Opener to answer a two-way black-suit control ask, showing first round control in one black suit and second-round or better control in the other.

The 3♥ call by Opener calso had a compound meaning, not just telling, but asking Responder about a spade tertiary honor control, general strength if no tertiary spade control, and club tertiary honor control if no spade tertiary honor control and generally weak within the range.

I think you catch my meaning now?

[Robert]

Hi everyone

Before you bid the grand, you might consider that 3-2 breaks occur a bit less than 70%.

How does your grand play with a 4-1 or 5-0 trump break?

You might want to find an old copy of the Ultimate Club system. It could find out about jacks.

Bridge World had a fairly recent article about asking for the trump Jack in RKC auctions. That article might be of interest.

Over your 2NT* bid wouldn't exchanging the 'asking' suit save space? You could use 3C* to ask about hearts?

Most modern relay methods show shape early and you might be better off than asking in every suit.

Regards,
Robert

[kenrexford]

Robert, on Aug 16 2007, 10:40 PM, said:

Hi everyone

Before you bid the grand, you might consider that 3-2 breaks occur a bit less than 70%.

How does your grand play with a 4-1 or 5-0 trump break?

You might want to find an old copy of the Ultimate Club system. It could find out about jacks.

Bridge World had a fairly recent article about asking for the trump Jack in RKC auctions. That article might be of interest.

Over your 2NT* bid wouldn't exchanging the 'asking' suit save space? You could use 3C* to ask about hearts?

Most modern relay methods show shape early and you might be better off than asking in every suit.

Regards,
Robert

That's a good point. I was kind of liking the fact that I was able to, in theory, show side 10's in the black suits if I wanted, and failed to mention the ability to show or deny the trump Jack, with a 5NT cue or lack thereof.