[matmat]

you are playing a fairly vanilla 2/1 variant.

One sided auction:

1♦ - 1♥
4♥ - 4NT*
5♦# - 6♦

* -- keycard.
# -- keycard response.

[655321]

Probably choice of slams. (Unless you are Ken Rexford, who might have invented a 1♥ response, for reasons I don't need to understand.)

[kenrexford]

655321, on Mar 29 2008, 10:05 PM, said:

Probably choice of slams. (Unless you are Ken Rexford, who might have invented a 1♥ response, for reasons I don't need to understand.)

Funny you say that...

I would not have a problem with any hand that would opt 1♥ without four hearts but would now be slammish in diamonds, but I know some who would.

That said -- choice for me.

[whereagles]

Can be:

1- choice of slams, or
2- asking for some diamond fillers for 7

Without agreement, I'd take it as choice.

[P_Marlowe]

undiscussed, choice.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jtfanclub]

655321, on Mar 29 2008, 10:05 PM, said:

Probably choice of slams. (Unless you are Ken Rexford, who might have invented a 1♥ response, for reasons I don't need to understand.) 

Pretty common to have to invent a response over 1♦ in SAYC, since there is no forcing raise.

Even if responder does have four hearts, he might still want to play in diamonds.

x
KQxx
KQJT987
x

How would you bid that one? 5♦ shows three aces.

I know I'm disagreeing with everybody, again, but I say 6♦ says I want to play in diamonds. Period. I think optional here is, well, not good. How is partner supposed to know that

AKQx
AJxx
xxx
Ax

is down in 6♥ 2/3 of the time on a diamond lead, but 6♦ makes over 90% on any lead?

[the hog]

Choice of slams.

[mike777]

In a blind pick up game, choice of slams

[joker_gib]

Choice

[Codo]

I had played it as asking for third round control, bcause I had not been sure if my pd and I are always on the same wavelength when it is COS (as is the majority vote here) and asking for control (as in the other example).

And 1 HEart surely had confessed 4 Hearts.

One more point I do not understand:
If I bid 1 Heart, why did I do so? Ovbviouly to descirbe my hand to my partner, so that we can fdind the best strain.
Now pd answers 4 Heart: Hey I have a great hand, so around 18-20 HCPS, but no long solid Diamonds (no 4 Diamond bid) and no black splinter.

I cannot construct hands, which are consistent with THIS bidding and opposite which I feel the need to play 6 Diamonds instead of 6 HEarts.
Maybe there are some, but I believe that there are more hands where I need a little more help in diamonds for the grand then hands where 6 Diamonds makes and 6 Heart fails.

[FrancesHinden]

If undiscussed, offering 6D as a contract.

Personally, I play it as asking for the KQ of diamonds, but that is discussed (if we want to play in diamonds we have to bid 6D over 4H). But then we don't play that an inverted raise denies a 4-card major, so with a slammish 4-4 or 4-5 in the reds we are likely to respond 2D not 1H.

[1eyedjack]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 31 2008, 01:00 PM, said:

If undiscussed, offering 6D as a contract.

Personally, I play it as asking for the KQ of diamonds, but that is discussed (if we want to play in diamonds we have to bid 6D over 4H). But then we don't play that an inverted raise denies a 4-card major, so with a slammish 4-4 or 4-5 in the reds we are likely to respond 2D not 1H.

Perhaps if it offers a choice of slams and you have the KQ of diamonds, you should be raising anyway?

[Cascade]

Jlall, on Mar 30 2008, 04:26 PM, said:

Natural, responder is probably 4-4 in reds.

Might not 5=4 in the reds be possible searching for an extra trick in a 4=4 diamond fit than we can take in a 5=4 heart fit.

[Fluffy]

with choice of slams I bid 6♦, not blackwood wich makes 6♦ a convention.

[jtfanclub]

Fluffy, on Mar 31 2008, 03:09 PM, said:

with choice of slams I bid 6♦, not blackwood wich makes 6♦ a convention.

So after the wonderful auction of

1♦-1♥-4♥

how do you get the contract to 6♦ with a swan?

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Mar 31 2008, 03:12 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Mar 31 2008, 03:09 PM, said:

with choice of slams I bid 6♦, not blackwood wich makes 6♦ a convention.

So after the wonderful auction of

1♦-1♥-4♥

how do you get the contract to 6♦ with a swan?

And how do you get partner's input when you don't know which is right (a much more common situation)? You can't do both.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Mar 31 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

And how do you get partner's input when you don't know which is right (a much more common situation)? You can't do both.

I think you can. I can't imagine the hand where...

1♦ 1♥
4♥ 5♦

was to play.

Actually, I'm having trouble thinking of a COS hand in this situation. Opener is defined so tightly (especially if he's denied shortness with his 4♥ leap) and responder is so poorly defined (probably 4 hearts, strong enough to try slam), that I have trouble with a hand that could correctly judge to stay in diamonds instead of taking back to hearts. Can you give me such an example?

I'm certainly not going to argue against using 6♦ on the original auction to ask for diamond fillers to try for 7♥. But that's by agreement. Meanwhile, in Detroit we lost a team game because our teammates went:

1♣ 1♠
4♠ 4NT
5♠ 6♣
6♠ 7♣
7♠

Responder had AKx KTx x AKJTxx. 7♣ had some play. 7♠ didn't. We lost more IMPs on that hand than we did on the other 23 boards combined, and ended up losing by 6. I can certainly understand why he bid 1♠, even if I don't like it. So this isn't just hypothetical to me.

[jdonn]

jtfanclub, on Mar 31 2008, 06:14 PM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 31 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

And how do you get partner's input when you don't know which is right (a much more common situation)? You can't do both.

I think you can. I can't imagine the hand where...

1♦ 1♥
4♥ 5♦

was to play.

And then so much for blackwood.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Mar 31 2008, 06:40 PM, said:

jtfanclub, on Mar 31 2008, 06:14 PM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 31 2008, 03:20 PM, said:

And how do you get partner's input when you don't know which is right (a much more common situation)? You can't do both.

I think you can. I can't imagine the hand where...

1♦ 1♥
4♥ 5♦

was to play.

And then so much for blackwood.

Yes, sorry...the post I was replying to said that

1♦ 1♥
4♥ 6♦

was choice of slams.

I'm saying that there should be some method to reach 6♦. I can accept that the method will not allow the use of Blackwood. It seems ridiculous to me that in most forms of 2/1 and SA, there isn't a single bid you can make that will allow you to explore for a a diamond slam across a diamond opener.