[OleBerg]

I was to fast with my first reply.

I agree that 7♣ is the best bid.

Best Regards

Ole Berg

[kenrexford]

What you do next after 2♣ is a matter of style. However, I cannot imagine that misleading partner, when we will establish a heart fit, is so bad when he might errantly conclude that you have 4315 rather than 5314.

The contrasting auction is hopelessly undefined.

We have started the auction by focusing spades, a decison that has already been well-argued as dubious. Partner limited his hand somewhat with a 2♦ call (not GF opposite a minimum). We set GF with 3♣, sharing no information about shape beyond that already shown. Partner jammed the H out of the auction with the oh-so-helpful 4NT blast, "extras and natural." So, partner rates to have a 2542 16-17 count, or so.

5♥ established trumps finally, above even the ability to ask for Aces or internal controls, but forcing. This should be a grand move as well, I would think (otherwise just bid 6♥?), but no definition as to what this shows.

Partner now makes a grand slam try of 6♦, but this is undefined other than "cue." Presumably, one would expect no spade control, as he might show the spade King or Queen (wild difference in value). Presumably he has no club card, either (why no 6♣ call?). Assuming 16-17, then, partner must have AQ(J) in hearts and AKQ(J) in diamonds. But, why 4NT with no club card? So, he has the club King but "does not need to bid that twice." How he knows that a club KING is a worthy card for a GRAND try is mindboggling. But, perhaps bypassing 6♣ infers a prime card (King but not Queen) that is not the Ace.

So, 17-3=14 points to spread out in the red suits. If he has the missing AQ in hearts, he has 7-8 in diamonds. AKJ or AQJ? Seems that AKJx makes the most sense. Maybe xx-AQxxx-AKJx-Kx? That gets us to 13 tricks, but with a lot of assumptions.

The primary assumption is that 6♦ must be a grand slam move and thus very primed. I'm not so sure that this is necessary, as 5♥ seems to have been a grand slam move, seeking cooperation from Opener. Would he not cooperate similarly with Qx-Axxxx-AKQx-Kx, a "better hand" but hopeless for the grand?

I'd much rather be in a sequence where I do not set trumps at the five-level, after revealing nothing to partner about my shape up to that point.

BTW -- notice one HUGE point. One concern about a 2♣ response was burying the fact that spades are five-long, creating a false illusion of 4315 rather than 5314. Notice, however, that the alternative sequence does not show the fifth spades, either, and leaves the club length a complete mystery entirely. This seems to happen a lot.

[FrancesHinden]

kenrexford, on Apr 7 2008, 08:33 PM, said:

The contrasting auction is hopelessly undefined.

We have started the auction by focusing spades, a decison that has already been well-argued as dubious. Partner limited his hand somewhat with a 2♦ call (not GF opposite a minimum). We set GF with 3♣, sharing no information about shape beyond that already shown. Partner jammed the H out of the auction with the oh-so-helpful 4NT blast, "extras and natural." So, partner rates to have a 2542 16-17 count, or so.

I agree the auction hasn't gone very well.

But it's not as bad as you say, partner can't possibly be 2542 that's an obvious 3S bid over 4SF without two club stops.

I tried to leave things a bit undefined when I started the thread, but to be honest I think partner has absolutely promised exactly 1543 with the 4NT bid. It could only ever be 2542 with AK or AQ of clubs and two low spades, and you know that's not partner's hand by looking at your club holding.

[kenrexford]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 7 2008, 03:50 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Apr 7 2008, 08:33 PM, said:

The contrasting auction is hopelessly undefined.

We have started the auction by focusing spades, a decison that has already been well-argued as dubious.  Partner limited his hand somewhat with a 2♦ call (not GF opposite a minimum).  We set GF with 3♣, sharing no information about shape beyond that already shown.  Partner jammed the H out of the auction with the oh-so-helpful 4NT blast, "extras and natural."  So, partner rates to have a 2542 16-17 count, or so.

I agree the auction hasn't gone very well.

But it's not as bad as you say, partner can't possibly be 2542 that's an obvious 3S bid over 4SF without two club stops.

I tried to leave things a bit undefined when I started the thread, but to be honest I think partner has absolutely promised exactly 1543 with the 4NT bid. It could only ever be 2542 with AK or AQ of clubs and two low spades, and you know that's not partner's hand by looking at your club holding.

Well, if you trust that partner cannot have a balanced 2542 with Kx in clubs for his 4NT call on an 18-count (I don't quite buy this), and if he MUST be 1543 shape (why no 4♣ call?), then he rates to have both red Aces and the club King for 11 of his points and needs an additional 5-6 to bid 4NT. Might as well add in the diamond King as a nice card from his perspective, leaving him 2-3 additional points.

We do not know the location of any red secondary honors (Q or J). Those are worth 6 total points. So, he has two red Jacks, one red Queen, or one red Queen with a red Jack. Two red Queens would be rich for 2♦.

Back to the basic problem -- establishing hearts at the five-level makes it impossible to check on trump quality, which seems really bad. There does not seem to be any way to check on whether we hold the heart Queen.

[hatchett]

I would think that 4NT should typically deliver one and a half or two club stops and a 1543 shape. 4♣ sounds like a good 1543 hand that is uncertain about strain say with one ♣ stop or worse. Most other shapes can make a more descriptive call over 3C.

[dburn]

awm, on Apr 7 2008, 12:06 PM, said:

My style is that 4♣ shows extras with no clear direction and 4NT is quantitative. So the 4♣ bid would deny a club control (i.e. K AQJxx AKxx xxx). In this style, 4NT could conceal a four card club suit. So I would try 7♣ (choice of slams) over 6♦.

While there are hands on which a 4-3 club fit is the only making grand, it seems that there is no obvious reason that our ruffing diamonds will not produce extra tricks whereas partner's ruffing spades will (in fact you need a place to put all these spade losers and you aren't likely to get enough ruffs to set up the suit). It seems like the odds of 7♣ failing on a 5-1 club break when 7♥ was making are about equal to the odds of 7♣ making when 7♥ fails.

So if 4♣ would've shown four clubs and 4NT denies four clubs, then I would just bid 7♥.

While I don't agree with Rexford's "always bid 2♣" strategy in general, I do like an immediate 2♣ response on this hand. It seems that responding in spades has additional problems (besides the hard to GF after 2♦ issues); for example what if partner raises spades on three, how do you back in to hearts? Assuming hearts are agreed, how do you convince partner that a spade holding like Qx(x) is awful whereas the club king is a huge card? Or that a singleton spade is great, whereas a singleton club is lousy? It seems that responding in spades will make partner suspect exactly the opposite of what's best here. And it's not like forcing game is a piece of cake after a start like 1♥-1♠-2♥ either. There are many cases like this where, if you know that you have a fit for partner's suit and need to temporize by bidding a new suit, it is better to bid the new suit where fitting kings or queens are useful and a singleton is bad, rather than vice versa.

Sometimes, I have difficulty believing that posts here are for real.

Playing with Ken Rexford and Adam Myerson as my team-mates the other day, my opponents held:

♠KQxx
♥Axxxx
♦AKxx
♣None

♠Axxxx
♥Kxx
♦x
♣AQJx

They bid confidently to 7♠, a contract that needed a little good fortune. Spades were 2-2 though, which enabled them to circumvent the 4-1 heart break easily enough.

On comparing scores, I was shocked to see that we had lost 2310 aggregate points on this deal. "What happened?" I enquired. "Well", said Myerson and Rexford in unison, "the auction started 1♥-2♣-2♦, and now we could never find our spade fit, so of course we played in 6♥ and the trumps broke 4-1."

"You morons", I screamed - then awoke to find that it was all a dream. Or was it?

[xcurt]

Why didn't I issue a game-forcing heart raise at my first call with this hand? OK I don't have the fourth trump I would be promising, but if this is my alternative, how bad can that be?

At this point I guess to bid 7H, even though I'm laying 1530/750 or slightly more than 2:1 odds. I don't think partner can cuebid here with less than HAQ, DA, CK. Opposite that I need 3-2 hearts and nothing really awful to happen when I try to ruff 2 diamonds in my hand. Partner has to have another card which could reduce the number of diamond ruffs required to 1.

Interestingly, bidding the grand at IMPs only lays 17:13 odds (they bid the small slam) or 26:17 (they miss the small slam) so in either case we need better odds at aggregate.

[kenrexford]

dburn, on Apr 7 2008, 06:33 PM, said:

♠KQxx
♥Axxxx
♦AKxx
♣None

♠Axxxx
♥Kxx
♦x
♣AQJx

Ah -- one problem, though. Opener is supposed to avoid a 2♦ rebid when he has four spades. Thus, with the suggested deal:

O: 1♥
R: 2♣
O: 2♠ (planning to bid diamonds later if needed)
R: 3♠...

If Opener has 4504, same principle. Show the spades and then raise the clubs.

After 1♥-P-2♣-P-2♠, Responder is expected to bid a waiting 2NT a lot to allow minor suit completion.

One might argue that a more effective method of bidding would allow:

1♥-P-2♣-P-
2♦-P-2♠-P-
3♠

However, 2♠ as a fourth-suit forcing bid makes this latter auction uncertain as establishing a fit, whereas bidding spades first avoids that uncertainty.

[benlessard]

Quote

But it's not as bad as you say, partner can't possibly be 2542 that's an obvious 3S bid over 4SF without two club stops.

With Kx of clubs partner will try to bid Nt to rightside the contract if Qxx vs Kx.+ a 3S bid followed by a 4nt would be keycard. So 4Nt is natural and could be many shapes imo.

Imo the real problem is that 3H isnt forcing. For me its so obvious that a GF bid is more important then a limit raise where i want to show my spades first. I rarely want to show a suit before raising unless im sure the opps wont interfere.

Its one more hand where 4st inv is a lot better then 4th forcing. I agree 4th suit INV aint perfect but i prefer to have problems on invitationnal hand then on GF hands.

1H---1S
2D---???

Its so obvious that 3D/3H/3S forcing and 2H multi inv is better then the otherway around. (3D/3H/3S) inv and 2H art GF.

[gnasher]

benlessard, on Apr 8 2008, 06:39 AM, said:

With Kx of clubs partner will try to bid Nt to rightside the contract if Qxx vs Kx.+ a 3S bid followed by a 4nt would be keycard. So 4Nt is natural and could be many shapes imo.

That argument might apply if he were bidding 3NT. Given that he is about to make a bid that suggests playing in 6NT, he's unlikely to be worried by what might happen if he is missing ♣A and loses a trick in another suit.

His extra values will also make him more interested in exploring the right strain, so he's unlikely to make a space-consuming jump when he has another bid available which is both cheaper and more descriptive.

Quote

1H---1S
2D---???

Its so obvious that 3D/3H/3S forcing and 2H multi inv is better then the otherway around. (3D/3H/3S) inv and 2H art GF.

I assume that you mean "3C multi inv"?

This sounds an interesting idea. What does responder do when he has a game force playable in several strains, but nothing obvious to show at the three level, such as AQ10xx Kx xxx Axx or AQ10xx Kx Axx xxx ?

[han]

I agree that partner should jump to 4NT with xx AQJxx AQJx Kx rather than bidding a less descriptive 3S.

For me 6D would absolutely deny the spade king, a big card on this auction. I'd bid 6H now.

[FrancesHinden]

The consensus from those who commented seems to be that 4C is a 1543 without a club stop (and hence lots of extra high cards).

There is a strong vote that 4NT might be 2542 but I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that front, I really can't construct a hand without two high club honours that would bid 4NT when the 'origin' of partner's 3C bid might be a game force in spades.

Anyway, the grand slam bidders are +1510 whether you bid 7H or 7C.

Partner has
x
AQJ10x
AQJ9
K10x

[FrancesHinden]

han, on Apr 8 2008, 12:11 PM, said:

I agree that partner should jump to 4NT with xx AQJxx AQJx Kx rather than bidding a less descriptive 3S.

For me 6D would absolutely deny the spade king, a big card on this auction. I'd bid 6H now.

Is this post totally consistent?

Opposite your example 2542 7H is pretty much cold. When we know partner has the CK from the 4NT bid, it doesn't really matter if she is 2-2 or 1-3 in the blacks.

[FrancesHinden]

xcurt, on Apr 8 2008, 02:56 AM, said:

Why didn't I issue a game-forcing heart raise at my first call with this hand? OK I don't have the fourth trump I would be promising, but if this is my alternative, how bad can that be?

.

Don't forget partner's 2D rebid was the worst possible one from your point of view; anything else (1NT, 2C, 2H, 2S, 2NT, 3C, 3D, 3H, 3S, 3NT...) would have been fine.

Maybe it's my 4-card major upbringing, but I shudder at the thought of showing four trumps via a game forcing raise when I only have three.

[nige1]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 8 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

Anyway, the grand slam bidders are +1510 whether you bid 7H or 7C. Partner has ♠x ♥AQJ10x ♦AQJ9 ♣K10x

I hope you did not lose the match by 100 points for honours

[FrancesHinden]

nige1, on Apr 8 2008, 04:47 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Apr 8 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

Anyway, the grand slam bidders are +1510 whether you bid 7H or 7C. Partner has ♠x ♥AQJ10x ♦AQJ9 ♣K10x

I hope you did not lose the match by 100 points for honours

Good point. +1610.

(we lost 500 points on the deal, so I must have had the original vulnerability wrong)

[kenrexford]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 8 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

Partner has
x
AQJ10x
AQJ9
K10x

Let's see what could have occurred:

1♥-P-2♣-P-
2♦-P-2♥-P-
3♣(two top hearts, plus the club King)-P-3♥(the third top heart, no diamond honor)-P-
3♠(spade control)-P-3NT(serious)-P-
4♦ (two top diamonds)-P-4NT(RKCB)...7♥

If not my cuebidding, it seems that Opener could clarify the 1543 pattern (3♣), later cue the club King (4♣) and then later show the heart A-Q and diamond A as a response to RKCB.

How did the opponents run into a problem?

[cherdano]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 8 2008, 09:31 AM, said:

han, on Apr 8 2008, 12:11 PM, said:

I agree that partner should jump to 4NT with xx AQJxx AQJx Kx rather than bidding a less descriptive 3S.

For me 6D would absolutely deny the spade king, a big card on this auction. I'd bid 6H now.

Is this post totally consistent?

Opposite your example 2542 7H is pretty much cold. When we know partner has the CK from the 4NT bid, it doesn't really matter if she is 2-2 or 1-3 in the blacks.

Why is it cold? (On a trump lead.) I agree though that the ♠K is not a very relevant card, we just need a second king besides all the keycards, or hope we don't get into entry troubles.

[kenrexford]

[never mind -- misread]

[benlessard]

Quote

That argument might apply if he were bidding 3NT. Given that he is about to make a bid that suggests playing in 6NT, he's unlikely to be worried by what might happen if he is missing ♣A and loses a trick in another suit.

With a big 2542 and the protected K of clubs why would he bid 3S ? With 5 reasonnable spades a doubleton H and maybe a diamond fit you might endup in 4S. If you bid 3S and partner raise to 4S is 4Nt keycard or natural ? It make sense to play 4nt as natural when you are limited and made a preference and partner showned no extras, but its a very rare and precise agreement.
AQT42
K9
Kxxx
xx

xx
AQJ10x
AQJ9
Kx
4Nt/4H/5D are quite better contract then 4S. Can you blame partner for bidding 4S over your 3S ?

Quote

The consensus from those who commented seems to be that 4C is a 1543 without a club stop (and hence lots of extra high cards).

Im wondering what ive would have done with a 0553 or 0643 and bad hearts. For me a 3D bid doesnt really show a 5th D, a bad 1543 and no club stopper or 2542 with good hearts or even 2641 and lousy H is a possible 3D rebid for me.