[benlessard]

In pair in a weak field.


1♣==1♦ (15+ , relay)
1♠==1Nt (5S 15-17 or GF, relay)
2♦==2♠ (4H, 2S is 0-9 preference)
2Nt==3♣ (2Nt GF 5422, 3C is keyc in S)
3♥==3♠ (3H=03, ask for Q♠
4♥== ??? (4h= Q♠+K♥+K♦ no K♣


opener is showing a Gf hand

5422, 3 keycard, Q of S + K♥+ K♦ no K♣

Scoring: MP

---

your options,
4S= sign off
4Nt ask for Q of H
5H ask for a club control.
5S ask for extra.

[awm]

So partner has shown three aces, the ♠Q, ♥K, ♦K. It seems that partner has a game force opposite nothing from me? So 20 hcp is not enough. With 5422 shape partner should have something like 24 hcp to be forcing game, and I have 8, and we're missing an ace and the club king. So partner is pretty much marked with ♥Q and at least two of the outstanding jacks.

Seems like:

(1) Partner is missing ♣A, we are off two top clubs.

(2) Partner is missing ♦A. Opponents can set slam by leading a club if the person with ♣K is not on lead.

(3) Partner is missing ♠A. Opponents can set slam by leading a club if the person with ♣K is not on lead, because we can't actually get to hand to pitch on a diamond.

(4) Partner is missing ♥A. In this case we will probably make the slam even on a club lead, since we can arrange a pitch on the ♦Q.

In any of these cases there are some additional issues if partner doesn't have the ♠J and spades break 4-1. Note that in each case we also have twelve tricks in notrump if we avoid a setting club lead.

So it seems like this is around 50% if opponents find the club lead. The auction is actually somewhat revealing, and with partner declaring the odds of a club lead against us are probably a lot higher than they would be opposite some bash auction like 2♣(strong)-2♦-2♠-3♠-keycard-response-6♠ (probably the field auction). For this reason I think I'd go with bidding 6NT. This has the effect of playing the hand from the opposite side, which will mean that I get a top any time the club king is in my LHO's hand (and a bottom if the club king is in RHO's hand and they find the lead). This seems like a better deal than my other options, since even if I stop in game and a club lead beats 6♠, I expect that a lot of the field will be in six on the bash auction and their opponents will not find that lead.

[kenrexford]

Let me get this straight. Opener could have:

If missing the heart Ace:

♠AQJxx ♥KQJx ♦AK ♣AJ to
♠AQxxx ♥Kxxx ♦AK ♣Ax

If missing the diamond Ace:

♠AQJxx ♥AKQJ ♦K10 ♣AJ to
♠AQxxx ♥AKxx ♦Kx ♣Ax

If missing the club Ace:

♠AQJxx ♥AKQJ ♦AK ♣Jx to
♠AQxxx ♥AKxx ♦AK ♣xx

...and Responder is supposed to make a good decision here?

I think that there is more to the story. By "GF," contextually, this must have more definition, I'm sure. I'd like to hear the full story, to determine whether the five-level is or is not relatively safe.

My additional concern is that the diamond cards are not all that impressive. Whereas I might be able to handle a 4-1 spade split itself, perhaps because of an unknown spade Jack or a finesse position, that split makes the diamond holding difficult to take full advantage of. Suppose not club lead, for example. If spades are 4-1, I may need to establish diamonds for a quick club ditch but then be unable to use a perhaps-established fourth diamond for a possibly-critical heart ditch. That and the fluidity problems in hearts. I might not be able, for instance, to handle AKJ10 in hearts even if the finesse works because I might not be able to repeat the finesse, and the heart Queen might be Qxxx.

Thus, I think I need more info.

[kfay]

I sign off.

[keylime]

I'm giving up easily. I do not want to make another asking bid because of the three dead hearts and club worry. If the opps are somehow alert in this auction, I fear a down 1.

[awm]

The 2♠ bid from our side showed "0-9 hcp" and partner's 2NT was "GF 5422."

So I think it's implicit that partner was willing to GF opposite 0 from us, meaning a minimum of something like 24 hcp (given the mostly-balanced shape) and placing partner with most of the missing queens and jacks.

[benlessard]

by GF we mean 9 tricks if the opener is in the M and 10 tricks if the opener have minors.

Our 1S opening is 12-14 or 18-22.
so 1C followed by 1S is 15-17 or GF.

♠AQxxx ♥KQJx ♦AK ♣Ax
♠AQxxx ♥AKQJ ♦Kx ♣Ax
♠AQJxx ♥AKJT ♦Kx ♣AJ

the 1 & 2 are strong enough for the GF type the 3rd hand is borderline.

♠Jxx give good play for game for 1 & 2

♥Qxxx is givng good play for game in 3.

IMHO opening 1S with these hands is slighty more dangerous then going overboard by GForcing

[Cascade]

We almost always give up when missing an ace and a potentially useful king. Especially when they could be in the same suit.

[kenrexford]

OK. Based on the new info, the five-level seems relatively safe. Any methods here? What would 4NT or a 5-bid show? If Opener allowed to bid again after a suggested signoff (meaning, 4♠ as LTTC-ish)?

[benlessard]

your options,
4S= sign off
4Nt ask for Q of H
5H ask for a club control.
5S ask for extras.

5C would ask for Q of D
5D would ask for Q of C
so ive removed them from the options

If you ask for the Q♥.

5C=no

5D= yes but no DQ
and now , 5H is still asking for a club controls but 5S is to play now.

Opener is not allowed to bid after the signoff unless mass amount of extra strenght.

[kenrexford]

5♠ then. I hate it.

It seems amazingly counter-intuitive to have the hand with GF opposite a possible 0 count try to unwind pattern, strength, and specfic honor location. Hence, the problem.

[benlessard]

Quote

It seems amazingly counter-intuitive to have the hand with GF opposite a possible 0 count try to unwind pattern, strength, and specfic honor location. Hence, the problem.

If you try with specifics card (and not with number of controls) its an illusion. It is as hard or tougher for responder to show the possible KJ♠,Q&J♦,Q&J♣ then to opener to show his cards. Its because either you ask for all the cards (without skipping) wich will worked better only when your searching for 3 cards or less. So the most common & probably best method is to ask for specific card wich mean that you will need to jump to bypass the cards you have to ask for the cards you dont have (spiral scan,denials cue-bids) wich in the long run = losing the same space

Lets put the strong hand as the captain (with the real hand i had where 6S was making because LHO had the K of clubs and S were 3-2)

Scoring: MP

---

You know partner is 3343.
you bid 3C to confirm S as trumps.
3D (1 or 4 keycard)-----???
3H would ask for Q of trumps
3S = ?K of H
3Nt= ?K of D
4C = ?K of C

4C ? -----4D (i dont have the K of clubs)

4H = ? QH
4S would be to play
4Nt = ? QD

4nt ? ----- 5H QD+QC but no JS.

Like you see its about the same space. Facing a weakish hand asking for controls (A=2 & K=1 or A=3 & K=1 or whatever) will probably save space but only when captain is balanced so that all controls are working. Give the strong hand a 6421 and the K of clubs might be an idle card. Modern consensus seems to show that the unbalanced hand should describe and not the balanced hand. This is because in the balanced hand there is more slot for honnor cards. In a 6421 you cant have 2 honnors in clubs. + in an unbalanced hand there is a probabilty of distribution.

In my example the strong hand has 2D and 2C but since the hand is known to have the KD and not the KC its twice as likely the hand is missing the AD then missing the AC.

Kx , Ax will be twice as likely then AK , xx.

There are also several other reason why its better to have the unbalanced hand revealling no matter how strenght is divided.

[kenrexford]

Well, assume the sequence is he same all the way up to the 2♠ call, setting spades, and then even the 2NT call showing 5422 pattern. Now, just cuebid.

Responder has a POC contextually -- only slow minor cards and the trump King, so, he bypasses everything to bid 3♠. No minor controls, no heart card, a spade King. Opener bids 3NT to show contexually serious interest anyway and control of all suits. Responder could now cue the COV (4♦), planning to later cue the club Queen (5♣) if necessary.

Or, perhaps better, a serious 3NT at this point should initiate ask-or-tell. Responder cues 4♣ because he has the club Queen. Opener bids 4♦ asking for the diamond Queen. Responder bids 5♦ to show the diamond Queen, not the club Jack or heart Jack, but the diamond Jack.

[Impact]

1D (16+) 1D (various)
1H (19+) 2D (6-9 flat or 10+flat lacking 2 controls)
2H ® 3C (4m333)
3D ® 3S( 3-3-4-3 8+)
4C ® 4D (1K)
4H ® 5C (DQ, SK no H Hon)
??depending on whether you think they will lead C, and where the CK is located, but the luck of relays is bad in this instance so responder is declarer in S....

Probably slightly better than 50%: tehy might not lead C when CK is offside...
regards,

[benlessard]

Quote

Well, assume the sequence is he same all the way up to the 2♠ call, setting spades, and then even the 2NT call showing 5422 pattern. Now, just cuebid.

Cue-bid that are A or K are a shortcut. If you try to show at first A followed be K and Q then cuebids are less effective then spiral. When partner make a cue in my singleton i have no idea if its the A or if its the K.

ABCDE,

cue-bids =
A= ive got A may or may not have B
B= ive got B & dont have A but may have C
C= i dont have A or B but have C & may have D.
D= i dont have ABC but i have D
etc...

Denials

A= i dont have A
B= i have A but not B
C = i have A & B but not C
D= i have ABC but not D

The difference is that cue-bids are denying a lot of card at the same time but never manage to show 2 card at once.

Denials cue are the opposite they show multiple card at once but only deny 1 card at the time.

If we check what is happening with regular cue and 2 players.

A-----B
D-----F
G-----
The 1st player has A ,D & G doesnt have C but might have E

The 2nd has B and F but not E but might have C

The 1st player dont know if partner got C
& the 2nd player dont know if partner has E
So neither is placed to make a clear decision.


Playing Denials
B-------C
D-------E
H-------I
K

B= ive got A but not B
C= do you have C ?
D= No
E = do you have D
H= yes and ive got E too but i dont have F
I = do you have G ?
K = i have G but not H

Its longer but there is no confusion.

the 1st player has
A,D,E,G.
and denied
B,C,F,H

So player 2 is well placed to make a decision.

When you have a lot of card denials is a bit faster and with no unknown.

The same thing for controls A=2 K=1 its a shortcut that dont work too well for unbalanced hands. 2 K but 1 in my singleton isnt the same thing has 1 ace.


Spiral & denials are the same but spiral is focussed on a specific card and not on a control + the order of the cards are based on lenght. If 5431 then K of H is before K of D because its probably more important and more probable.

Quote

1D (16+) 1D (various)
1H (19+) 2D (6-9 flat or 10+flat lacking 2 controls)
2H ® 3C (4m333)
3D ® 3S( 3-3-4-3 8+)
4C ® 4D (1K)
4H ® 5C (DQ, SK no H Hon)

Just curious how responder know 4H isnt to play ? How do you set trumps ?

[Impact]

Ben,

First of all, i disagree with you about the value of A=2 K=1 controls as the answer to the number of controls question in many cases it is sufficient knowledge to know whether to continue towards slam or not (whereas AKQ points will not be definitive).

If proceeding towards slam an A is different from 2 K - and each may be of advantage but premature decisions on trumps can be very costly too....there are many varieties of hands which may play in different denominations depending on overall strength/controls (eg NT v 5/6/7minor or Major game as opposed to higher minor contract etc).

In answer to your question about setting trumps, it is not done until the relay player sets the final contract (which allows you to change tacks as in for example the Polish league bidding match where you were probably going to play in S until you realise that the Moysian 6D with KQx opposite your AJTx is superior).

Trumps are set following GF relays:-
a) by a reversion to a suit (no- 1-step relay) below 3NT if you wish to step out of relay

above 3NT by any non-1 step relay as terminal.

The options will allow you (certainly with 20-20 hindsight) to get the path right....most relay players end up using the relays on 95+% hands as the handtypes on which relay breaks are advantageous become more obvious with time (but only that 20/20 hindsight will let you know when the singleton J was crucial and you should have broken relay...!)

regards

[benlessard]

Quote

A=2 K=1 controls as the answer to the number of controls question in many cases it is sufficient knowledge to know whether to continue towards slam or not (whereas AKQ points will not be definitive).

I agree that controls will do good on most hands. But the slams im looking to bid are those where Q and J are key cards.

Kxx
xxx
QJxx
Qxx

AQxxx
AKQJ
Kx
Ax

What make slam good or not good is the J of H, J of clubs (if hand is played by south) J of D to discard the losing clubs. That the kind of slam where you need sharper methods that I find interesting.

[Impact]

Yes - and when the strong hand relays he will find all that information relatively comfortably:-

1C 16+ 1D (neg or 8-9 flat or 20+)
1H 19/20+ 2D= 6-9 flat
2H R 3C= 4m333
3D R 3S= K
4C R 4S= DQ, SK no HAKQ
4N R 5H= CQ, DJ no SJ
6S hoping for either no C lead or favourable position or CJ still possible....

wtp?
regards,

[benlessard]

WTP ? It not a big problem just that what im trying to say is that cue-bids like several bidding gadgets are shortcuts.

When you cue-bid is 3S you show the A or the K, someday knowing if its the A or K will make all the difference.
Over 4C if you had showned a H controls it might have be the K or Q (A isnt possible because of hcp count)
When you describe a balanced hand since there is so many pattern usually you endup taking a shortcut like 3343 or 3334.
When we ask for keycards and we are missing 1 keyc it bug me to not know wich 1 is missing.
Just to consider the K of trumps as having the same value as an A is a big shortcut , ATxx vs J9xxx isnt the same thing as Kxxx vs J9xxx.

Turbo wich showed odd or even number of keycard is a more dangerous shortcut then 14-30. Sooner or later we all pick a hand were we are pretty sure hes got 3 KEYC but are still afraid that hes got 0. Imagine if its 0-2 or 1-3-5

When you cuebid (or bypass the cuebid) in trumps suit to show AK/none vs Ax or Kx sooner or later you will reach 6 lacking AK of trumps.

Another shortcut is not setting a trumps suit. In your example after 5H you are propelled to 6S anyway since 5S would continue the relay (im guessing here).

Lets say for example that partner is showing a balanced hand and have just showned 4S, if you decide to skip a bid to agree spades then when youll be near 3Nt/4D then both those bid become working bids since 4S is the only signoff now.
So the bidding space spent will comeback with benefits.

Some classic cue-bidding are a pain. When a cue is A,K or shortness is something that i find awful. AQJTx facing K or stiff ? Axx facing Kxx or a stiff ?

I completly understand that shortcut are a necessity and that most time you can make a pretty good educated guess. Its like MP3 (& lossy compression) its a trade-off between acceptable or unnoticable ''information distorsion'' vs economy of space (wich in return will allow you to get further information).

Ive tried playing controls A=3 and K=1 (instead of A=2 K=1) after getting some nasty hands where slam was good if partner had the 2K but was terrible if he had the A or vice-versa that ive wanted more clarity. When partner is showing 3 controls you always know if its KKK or A, same when its show 4,when he show 5 its AKK etc . It worked pretty well until you get a hand with KKKQQ wich is 3 controls and a hand AAA wich is 9 controls and take more then a full level of bidding.

All the science is to determine how much space are you willing to spent vs how much uncertainty you are willing to accept. But at the same time does it make sense to have tools to find Jacks when you dont know for sure if partner hand was 3343 or 3334 or that his cue was an A or K (or even a Q). I think that if you have enough space or willingness to find a J then maybe you should aim for unambigous information earlier in the bidding.

[Impact]

Sorry, I should have specified that specifically it was 3-3-4-3 and shown (no we don't lose that).

Next in this sequence having shown 1 control only for the limited HCP we denial cue AKQ (different rules for different strengths and shapes having spent some time with this over the last 2 decades!!).

eg if having shown 0-4/5 step 1=0 Q , 2=Q, 3=K, 4=QQ/A, 5=KQ

5-9 step 1= no control, 2= K, 3= A, 4=KK, 5=AK, 6=KKK

8+ positive starts with base =2 (but if signoff without control ask, not only does responder require additional values but step1=base of 3, and if "signedoff having show extras but not quantified controls, base=5)
opening bid assumes base =3


As to your complaints about "multi-cues" ie A/K/short, that is a matter for the partnership to institute its own rules firstly as to when multicues apply and secondly as to how to apply them.

My personal rules with partners include:-

a) hand defines shape first if possible to show length of side suits

if raising partner's suit on limited basis define your terms (eg HCP, cover cards, limit, forcing, slam-try)

c) where one hand knows the other hand's cover card number, the issue is as to specific cards : so usually A before K (with NT for trumps)

d) where the "numbers" are indeterminate (eg following Strong Club/FP opening and intervention then suit agreement) multi cues are appropriate but now
i) on the first opportunity to show a control in a suit you do NOT show distributional controls (shortage) in partner's known long suit
ii) higher NT is needed for DI

iii) once you embark on this route you do NOT stick Bw/KCB etc into the middle of the auction: you went this way for a reason and you continue...whichever form of cue-bidding has been commenced.

In contrast to most, I will use some form of Bw very very rarely: preferring to bid the slam direct or cue-bid: the only time I use KCB (or Kickback in more sophisticated partnerships) is simply to check that I have the requisite numbers as the prior auction should have indicated the strength ....

All bidding is a compromise, but as a classical music lover and Hifi nut (but with a wife who precludes ridiculous expenditure on it) I still HATE MP3 for serious music: that is one compormise I won't make!

regards