[Gerben42]

In my own Fantunes it is nice to start with 1♦ with the 5332 and with 1♣ with the 4333 hand:

1♦ - 1♠!
1NT* - 2♣+
2NT - 3♣%
3♥

! ♥
* 18+
+ GF
% Checkback

Responder knows 18+ with 5♦3♥32, will ask for Aces, Kings and the ♥Q and bid 7.

1♣! - 1♠*
2♦+ - 4♦%

! Could be short
* ♥
+ GF, 3-card support
% Splinter

This will brake North of course.

[ASkolnick]

1♦-1H♥
2N-3♥
3♠-4♣
(Cuebid, we do cuebid Kings or Aces below games not singletons
4NT-5♦ (3 Keycards)
7♥

Same except I can't count 13 tricks with AKxx of diamonds.
So 6♥ instead of 7.

[skjaeran]

1.
1♦ - 1♥
1NT - 2♣
2♠ - 3♥
3♠ - 3NT
4♣ - 4NT
5♠ - 5NT
6♦ - 7♥

1NT=5332 18-19, 2♣=asking, 2♠=2353, cuebids, serious 3NT, RKCB, GS inv, ♦K, 13 winners.

2.
1♣ - 1♦
1♥ - 2♦
3NT - 4♣
4♦ - 4NT
5♠ - 5NT
6♣ - 6♥

1♦=trf, 2♦=GF, 3NT=18-19 3♥, 4♣=cue agreeing ♥.
When north can't bid anything but 6♣ and pass there can't be a grand.

[Echognome]

Although Phil is correct that we have a nice gadget for the 5♦332 hand, it would not be as easy if the minors were switched. It would be difficult to tell a 2335 from a 3334 with the same honors. I can't answer unbiasedly that we'd get to the right spot on both with the minors switched.

In my other partnership, if given an uncontested relay, I'd like to think it wouldn't be so difficult.

[Echognome]

I've thought about these hands some more.

I have one question for most of the bidders (although Jdonn mentioned a similar problem).

If you are not relaying out exact shape, how are you bidding the same hands with South holding:

♠Ax
♥AJTxxx
♦x
♣Axxx

[655321]

Echognome, on Jan 17 2008, 07:47 PM, said:

I have one question for most of the bidders (although Jdonn mentioned a similar problem).

If you are not relaying out exact shape, how are you bidding the same hands with South holding:

♠Ax
♥AJTxxx
♦x
♣Axxx

I mentioned in my first post I would bid the same way on this hand.

Although, I notice I spelt 2614 as 2613

[han]

It's spelled "spelled".

[awm]

Echognome, on Jan 17 2008, 07:47 PM, said:

I've thought about these hands some more.

I have one question for most of the bidders (although Jdonn mentioned a similar problem).

If you are not relaying out exact shape, how are you bidding the same hands with South holding:

♠Ax
♥AJTxxx
♦x
♣Axxx

This hand is not that big of a problem. We can pitch a club on the second top diamond and try to ruff out diamonds. This will make any time diamonds are 4-3, or if the five-card diamond holding is with a four-card club holding. Not the best grand slam in the world, but certainly decent chances to make.

The problem pattern is:

♠Ax
♥AJTxxx
♦xxx
♣Ax

Here you have some very poor squeeze chance (clubs 6-2 with the longer diamonds in the six-card club hand I suppose makes it) but this is truly an awful grand slam.

A diamond splinter at some point would rule out this particular hand type and would make it possible to bid the grand with some accuracy. Another possibility is to bid something like:

1♦ - 1♥
2NT - 3♥(1)
3♠ - 4♣
4NT - 5♦
6♦(2) - 6♠(3)
7♥

(1) Forcing
(2) Asking for a third round diamond control
(3) Third round (or second round!) shortness control

Note that with xx diamonds things are even better (now need only 4-2 break).

[gnasher]

Hannie, on Jan 18 2008, 06:50 PM, said:

It's spelled "spelled".

That depends on what flavour of English you learnt. Perhaps you should be careful before you criticise?

[han]

Careful is not my style. I prefer to react quickly and then admit later how wrong I was if necessary.

[cherdano]

gnasher, on Jan 18 2008, 12:36 PM, said:

Hannie, on Jan 18 2008, 06:50 PM, said:

It's spelled "spelled".

That depends on what flavour of English you learnt. Perhaps you should be careful before you criticise?

It is spelled "flavor".

[han]

Maybe to Americans like you Cherdano.

[655321]

Hannie, on Jan 18 2008, 12:50 PM, said:

It's spelled "spelled".

No, it's spelt "it", spelt is spelt "spelt", and spelled is spelt "spelled".

Don't words look funny when you keep reading and re-reading them?