[kenrexford]

Well, the change of the hand is more substantial than it seems.

If Opener cannot have AK in diamonds, he seems to me to have a MUCH higher likelihood of a club control for this sequence. As he can and did have AK-A and a doubleton heart, then his likelihood of lacking a club control increases.

Many of us felt that 5♦ may be the technically correct call but not so much the practical call given the likely hands for Opener. The switch seems to me to substantially change this.

But, despite that, I think the overall point was a good one, even if the slight variation changed things. You actually ended up with a more interesting problem, because we ended up discussing a close-call scenario and the reasons for selecting between 4NT and 5♦ from theory, judgment, and practicality perspectives.

[kenrexford]

Cascade, on Feb 29 2008, 07:08 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Mar 1 2008, 12:47 PM, said:

What I don't get, though, is not cooperating in this sequence.  From my memory, it seems that 1♦-P-1♠-P-2♠-P-3♥ is wildly more often a slam move sequence than a game try sequence.  Maybe a 10:1 favorite to be a slam try sequence rather than 1:10 as you suggest.

You'll need to do more to convince me of that.

Um.

I'm swinging a pendant before your eyes. Watch it closely. While watching the pendant, think about a cool breeze on a summer's eve, swallows buzzing about the chimney. Sleep. Sleeeeep.

[cherdano]

kenrexford, on Feb 29 2008, 05:47 PM, said:

Jlall, on Feb 29 2008, 03:51 PM, said:

Cascade, on Feb 29 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

Jlall, on Feb 29 2008, 01:37 PM, said:

5D, good lesson for B/I is not to bid keycard when you have xx in an unbid suit, cuebiddng is better.

I cannot see passing this one, and definitely think 7 is in the picture and plan on trying for it.

I don't think grand is possible. I want partner to do something different than 4♠ with three bullets over 3♥.

People on these forums always talk about "cuebiddng" frequently over game try auctions, but I think doing that is way too likely to give something away the 90 % of the time partner has a game try rather than a slam try, and I do not see the problem with partner, who has a slam try, biddng over a jump to game, which shows extras.

Not to mention I don't think a hand like Axxx xx Axxx Axx is good enough to cuebid, or even as good as some hands posted in this thread offered as constructions for partner's 4S bid.

I can understand the debate as to whether it makes sense or not to cuebid if the slam try is rare, such as an auction like 1♠-P-2♠-P-3♥, although I happen to come down on the side of cuebidding there also.

What I don't get, though, is not cooperating in this sequence. From my memory, it seems that 1♦-P-1♠-P-2♠-P-3♥ is wildly more often a slam move sequence than a game try sequence. Maybe a 10:1 favorite to be a slam try sequence rather than 1:10 as you suggest.

Ken, I think this is exactly why so many on this forum disagree with you so often. For most of us, most sequences are not slam tries. "Game before slam", "Strain over level" etc.

[kenrexford]

cherdano, on Mar 1 2008, 12:09 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Feb 29 2008, 05:47 PM, said:

Jlall, on Feb 29 2008, 03:51 PM, said:

Cascade, on Feb 29 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

Jlall, on Feb 29 2008, 01:37 PM, said:

5D, good lesson for B/I is not to bid keycard when you have xx in an unbid suit, cuebiddng is better.

I cannot see passing this one, and definitely think 7 is in the picture and plan on trying for it.

I don't think grand is possible. I want partner to do something different than 4♠ with three bullets over 3♥.

People on these forums always talk about "cuebiddng" frequently over game try auctions, but I think doing that is way too likely to give something away the 90 % of the time partner has a game try rather than a slam try, and I do not see the problem with partner, who has a slam try, biddng over a jump to game, which shows extras.

Not to mention I don't think a hand like Axxx xx Axxx Axx is good enough to cuebid, or even as good as some hands posted in this thread offered as constructions for partner's 4S bid.

I can understand the debate as to whether it makes sense or not to cuebid if the slam try is rare, such as an auction like 1♠-P-2♠-P-3♥, although I happen to come down on the side of cuebidding there also.

What I don't get, though, is not cooperating in this sequence. From my memory, it seems that 1♦-P-1♠-P-2♠-P-3♥ is wildly more often a slam move sequence than a game try sequence. Maybe a 10:1 favorite to be a slam try sequence rather than 1:10 as you suggest.

Ken, I think this is exactly why so many on this forum disagree with you so often. For most of us, most sequences are not slam tries. "Game before slam", "Strain over level" etc.

Although I hear what you are saying, I doubt that anyone would agree with how you have implicitly phrased this.

Although most people use game-before-slam thinking, I cannot imagine that anyone would classify 2♠ as simply a game try and not possibly a slam try. This 2♠ call is clearly and unambguously a call that cannot be deciphered yet as to whether Responder's intentions are game-only or slam.

Of all of the "might just be a game try" sequences, however, this one is the one that seems most likely to be a slam try. The opponents are silent. Responder is unlimited as to HCP.

I'd be real curious as to how often this sequence actually is the start of a game try rather than a slam try. My bet would be that it is at least 51% ST, although my guess is that it is closer to 80-90% slam try. I know that the likelihood is 90% for me, because I'd quantitative bash a 2NT invite with most GT hands.

As an interesting aside, I find it curious that folks will not cooperate with calls like this, claiming a concern over disclosure and perhaps thinking that I am not so concerned. In practice, however, my thinking is VERY bash oriented as to game tries, and I avoid this type of GT unless I have a very good reason, opting the extremely non-disclosing 2NT or 3♥ the vast majority of the time.

[han]

I think that 3♥ is very often a search for the right strain, slightly less often a gametry and least often (but still fairly often) a slam try.

[jtfanclub]

han, on Mar 1 2008, 05:53 PM, said:

I think that 3♥ is very often a search for the right strain, slightly less often a gametry and least often (but still fairly often) a slam try.

Gawd, I hate Standard American. Half of the bids mean "Guess what I want you to show, and show it". I'm not sure where these psychic impressions should come from, but I know I don't have that talent, and neither do my partners. I've had people pass it, and I've had people bid 5♣, both on random guesses as to what I was looking for.

If the "usual" meaning was an invitation to game in spades, it should show extras, no minor suit aces or voids, and probably 4 spades. Has to be Axxx x QJTxx KQJ. So pass.

If the "usual" meaning was a slam try in spades, it should show no extras, no minor suit aces or voids, and probably 4 spades. Axxx x QJTxx KJx assuming you open that. So pass.

If them "usual" meaning was choice of games, it shows a clear preference for spades. I have no idea what else he has.

So I guess I'll pray to the card gods and pass.

[han]

JT, stop babbling.