[skjaeran]

Fluffy, on Sep 3 2007, 09:38 PM, said:

I wouldn't open 2♣.

Wow!! I know I open far more hands at the 1-level than most. But this is beyond me - a 24 hcp 3 loser hand... You don't need more than xxx xxx xxxx xxx for 4♥ to be a reasonable game, how do you think you'll get there? (Sure, I know: 1♥ p p x/1♠, 4♣ p 4♥ )

[mike777]

SchTsch, on Sep 3 2007, 10:08 AM, said:

mike777, on Sep 3 2007, 10:03 AM, said:

no partner cannot have that hand for me.

And how do you bid that hand? 3♥ and signoff in every subsequent bid?

I think with your two example hands getting to 6H is difficult. I may miss it.
You are talking about getting to a 26 hcp slam with no voids.

2c=2h(deny a or k, unlimited small pts)
3h(forcing)=4h(minimum but still can have some queens here)

Now I think opener has a tough decision.
options are:
1) pass, partner could have zero hcp. But then even on your bidding partner could have zero hcp..so we got a problem....partner could have wasted D and 5 could be down.......
2)4s rkc planning on asking for q of h.
3) 4nt spade cue asking partner to cue some values....

I lean towards passing 4H as even the 5 level is not safe but.....it is a problem.

I see no reason why on your auction 4h promises 4 hearts as others suggest. Partner could have QJ of d and 3 small hearts and still bid 4H...not 3h or a double negative if you play that.

[Codo]

6 ♣ choice of slam too. Even opposite xxx,xxxx,xxxx,xx 6 Heart has play.
And pd ios allowed to hold a little more.

[mike777]

Codo, on Sep 4 2007, 02:19 AM, said:

6 ♣ choice of slam too. Even opposite xxx,xxxx,xxxx,xx 6 Heart has play.
And pd ios allowed to hold a little more.

good grief...

bidding 24 hcp slams....with no voids....


is this why we lose at bridge?

[Codo]

Maybe HCP fixation is why we loose at bridge.
Passing 1 Spade with x,xxxxx,Kxxxxx,x, bidding game with 3 loosers opposite 2 possible covers.....

[SchTsch]

mike777, on Sep 3 2007, 03:10 PM, said:

I see no reason why on your auction 4h promises 4 hearts as others suggest. Partner could have QJ of d and 3 small hearts and still bid 4H...not 3h or a double negative if you play that.

It doesn't.
4♥ promises 3+ hearts and a rubbish hand, while 3♥ promises some values.

[skjaeran]

SchTsch, on Sep 5 2007, 02:52 PM, said:

mike777, on Sep 3 2007, 03:10 PM, said:

I see no reason why on your auction 4h promises 4 hearts as others suggest.  Partner could have QJ of d and 3 small hearts and still bid 4H...not 3h or a double negative if you play that.

It doesn't.
4♥ promises 3+ hearts and a rubbish hand, while 3♥ promises some values.

To me 4♥ shows 4c support and rubbish. With 3c support and rubbish we bid 3♣=2nd negative, and if stronger we rebid 2NT, then 3/4♥ as appropriate.

[mikeh]

Another problem posted with inadequate explanation of the meaning of the bids so far. This is tough to avoid, since we all tend to think that whatever is standard in our neck of the woods is standard elsewhere.

Now we are told that responder's sequence to 4♥ could be xxx xxx xxxxx xx or equivalent... if I understand correctly. That makes driving to slam very bad, but I assume partner could also have xxx xxxx xxxx Qx, and now 7 has decent play!

I prefer an immediate second negative bid (which on this hand would have partner as declarer, and would actually make the auction even worse)

As it is, with the conditions of contest finally clarified (I think), I agree with 4♠ and over 5♣ I agree with Harald: bid 5♦ and respect a 5♥ signoff and hope to make it.

Of course, I may be going down in 6 on a spade lead even if he has xxxx in trump and the ♣Q... but I want to be in slam opposite that holding.

[the hog]

Agree that the methods are poor. 4H to me shows a poor hand and at least 4 card support - poor being a couple of Qs at best. With 4 card support, there are a number of hands partner can have that make slam ok. As with Mikeh and Harals, I think a second negative should show the absolute rubbish 3 card hand.

[SchTsch]

The_Hog, on Sep 5 2007, 08:39 PM, said:

Agree that the methods are poor. 4H to me shows a poor hand and at least 4 card support - poor being a couple of Qs at best. With 4 card support, there are a number of hands partner can have that make slam ok. As with Mikeh and Harals, I think a second negative should show the absolute rubbish 3 card hand.

Methods are poor but are the only methods you got. It is your occasional partner who tends to forget a lot of stuff you agree to play so you tend to keep it simple.

On this board partner had:

Jxxx
109x
xxxx
Q10