[han]

x AKxxxx Ax xxxx.

1S - 2H
3C - ??

What's your call at (1) IMPs and (2) MPs.

[FrancesHinden]

I don't think the form of scoring matters.

Does 3C show extras, or are we playing 2/1 and it doesn't?

[kenrexford]

System?

Assuming 2/1, 3♦/3♦.

[han]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 25 2008, 11:49 AM, said:

Does 3C show extras, or are we playing 2/1 and it doesn't?

Well, this hand is fabricated but clearly methods matter.

You could answer the question using your preferences or assume 2/1 with 3C showing extras, which is what I prefer.

[mike777]

4C both
KISS
support with support, etc.

[helene_t]

Not sure what 3♦ would mean (I like to play it as FSF). Anyway, 3♥ now. If p bids 3NT, I pass. If he bids 3♠, I bid 3NT at MPs and 4♣ at IMPs.

[ArtK78]

I don't like the idea of supporting partner's second suit (which may be fictitious) on 4 small.

I bid 3♥ if it is forcing. Otherwise, I bid 3♦. The form of scoring is not relevant.

We could get to a slam in hearts where there is no trump loser and club loser(s) might go away on partner's spades. Partner could hold:

AKQxx
Qxx
x
Axxx

or even

AKQxx
QJ
x
Axxxx

On this last hand, 6♥ will probably make while 6♣ could fail on 3-1 clubs.

There is still time to get to clubs. Partner could bid them again or bid 3♠. I will support clubs later if necessary.

[Apollo81]

I am OK with either 3♥ or 4♣. I would bid 3♥ if I knew I could bid a forcing 4♣ next.

[jdonn]

I definitely prefer 4♣. If partner is a minimum with a doubleton heart he will definitely bid 4♥ next which I'm happy to pass. In other cases we have great potential in clubs. I think if I rebid 3♥ and partner bids 3♠ and I bid 4♣, the auction is getting too murky.

[helene_t]

ArtK78, on Apr 25 2008, 05:58 PM, said:

I don't like the idea of supporting partner's second suit (which may be fictitious) on 4 small.

I bid 3♥ if it is forcing.

Even if 2♥ wasn't GF, 3♣ would be.

And I think Han would have specified it we should assume Acol. So no, 3♣ promises clubs.

[dcvetkov]

Trumps are weak, but I think 4♣ is what partner wants to hear. I see a slam provided there are no more then 1 trump loser I would like to be able to bid 4♠ as splinter agreeing clubs, but would be too natural, and I am not sure if there are gounds for some agreement like that.?

But I am not convinced partner will bid 4H next with doubleton heart, would that be a cue bid agreeing clubs and slam interest or offering choice of games and showing exactly 2♥?

[mikeh]

ArtK78, on Apr 25 2008, 11:58 AM, said:

I don't like the idea of supporting partner's second suit (which may be fictitious) on 4 small.

This seems to be my 'disagree with Art on everything' day

System was not specified, but I know of no method, commonly played in NA, in which opener needs to or should even contemplate making a 'fictitious' 3♣ call. Our 2♥ promised a rebid in SA and was GF in 2/1 and near gf in BWS.

I agree that xxxx is not a slam-suitable holding, but the rest of the hand is very slam oriented opposite many 1♠ - 3♣ holdings: consider a minimum hand such as AKxxx x xx AKxxx

Partner will/should return to hearts with many doubletons, especially when lacking 5 clubs, so I will bid 4♣, with trepidation.

[gnasher]

4♣ at any form of scoring. If partner's clubs aren't real, he will have a doubleton heart and will bid 4♥.

We could easily have a slam - AKQxx x xxx AQ10x would do. Even opposite AKQxx x Qxx KQxx, 5♣ might be the highest-scoring spot.

[dcvetkov]

gnasher, on Apr 25 2008, 02:05 PM, said:

4♣ at any form of scoring. If partner's clubs aren't real, he will have a doubleton heart and will bid 4♥.

We could easily have a slam - AKQxx x xxx AQ10x would do. Even opposite AKQxx x Qxx KQxx, 5♣ might be the highest-scoring spot.

4♣ was an easy part. The real headache is what is opener supposed to do with , for example your hand in example ? ( although I expect partner to have better hand then this for 3♣ Should he move to slam? Is it worth exploring? Should he bid 5♣? Would 4♥ would be to play or cue bid? Would 4♠ would be to play or cuebid?
is 4NT a good bid, which will get us too high some of the time?

Too many questions, at least I dont have the answers.

[kenrexford]

I don't get any of this nonsense about bidding 4♣ as the best route to find a heart fit and to also raise clubs.

Isn't 3♦ a general expression of a desire to hear more, and thus perfect?

What can happen here after 3♦?

1. Partner could bid 3♥. Tada!
2. Partner could bid 3♠ or 3NT, after either of which I can bid 4♣ to scream slammish club support with six hearts. Tada!
3. Partner could bid 4♣. Ding-Ding-Ding!!!

Any other call works OK also.

In contrast, a 4♣ call now is sort of like trying to cut thin slices of blue cheese with a butter knife.

[gnasher]

dcvetkov, on Apr 25 2008, 08:25 PM, said:

4♣ was an easy part. The real headache is what is opener supposed to do with , for example your hand in example ? ( although I expect partner to have better hand then this for 3♣ Should he move to slam? Is it worth exploring? Should he bid 5♣? Would 4♥ would be to play or cue bid? Would 4♠ would be to play or cuebid?
is 4NT a good bid, which will get us too high some of the time?

Too many questions, at least I dont have the answers.

I have some answers:

- 4♥ would be to play, with a 5224 or occasionally a 5233.

- 4♠ would, IMO, be a cue bid. The only other possible meaning is five strong spades, four weak clubs, and short hearts, but with this I think he should have bid something other than 3♣. [Edit: corrected a typing error - thanks Han]

- With either of my example hands, 4NT by opener would be a dreadful bid.

- One way to cope with my two example hands is for opener to bid 4♠ on both, responder to bid an encouraging 4NT (or an encouraging 5♣), and opener to bid a slam with AKQxx x xxx AQ10x but not with AKQxx x Qxx KQxx. Of course, that would mean giving up the ability to bid RKCB, so the idea is obviously barking.

- Another way to cope with my two example hands is for opener to bid 4♠ on the hand with good trumps and two aces, but not on the one with moderate trumps and only one ace.

- Or, you could have the same auction on both hands, and either miss a slam that's decent but not cold, or reach one that's poor but playable.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2008-April-25, 15:49

[han]

As I said, this was not an actual hand. Yesterday I was playing with rogerclee for the first time and we had these two hands:

x AKxxxx Axx Jxx

QJxxxx J10 - AKQ10x

Our auction was 1S-2H-3C-3H-4H. We didn't agree on anything, though of course we have read many forum posts of eachother. Here we both assumed that 2H was gameforcing and 3C showed extra values.

A good player thought 4C instead of 4H was also an option with my hand (what do people here think?). He said he would have bid 3H even with x AKxxxx Ax Jxxx. Well, he assumed 3C did not show extra values which changes things.

3H with that hand really didn't seem right to me so I removed the jack and asked people here.


(Gnasher, I think you meant "3C" instead of "4C" on the third line of your last post)

[ArtK78]

han, on Apr 25 2008, 03:49 PM, said:

As I said, this was not an actual hand. Yesterday I was playing with rogerclee for the first time and we had these two hands:

x AKxxxx Axx Jxx

QJxxxx J10 - AKQ10x

Our auction was 1S-2H-3C-3H-4H. We didn't agree on anything, though of course we have read many forum posts of eachother. Here we both assumed that 2H was gameforcing and 3C showed extra values.

A good player thought 4C instead of 4H was also an option with my hand (what do people here think?). He said he would have bid 3H even with x AKxxxx Ax Jxxx. Well, he assumed 3C did not show extra values which changes things.

3H with that hand really didn't seem right to me so I removed the jack and asked people here.


(Gnasher, I think you meant "3C" instead of "4C" on the third line of your last post)

I would rebid 4♣ on your cards, Han.

Opposite as little as K/AK or A/AK or AK/A in the majors and three small clubs you rate to make 6♣. And partner could easily have more than that. And bidding 4♣ doesn't mean you can't still get to 4♥ when it is right. Or 4♠ for that matter.

[mike777]

I think this is a tough actual hand and I can see many ways to miss slam. Bidding 25 hcp minor suit slams are hard. Even more difficult if you have an eight card major fit.


It seems opener with a 4 loser hand a known 8 card heart fit and partner making a gameforce 2h bid should do more.

4c over 3h is possible, but I think this is a tough hand.

[mikeh]

Tough hand

3♣ seems clear despite the modest high card.. if the reds were reversed, I'd bid 2♠... but they aren't reversed

3♥ seems clear

4♥... hell of a tough situation. I can see arguments for 3♠, 4♣ and 4♥

If game is the limit, then 4♥ seems best.

If slam is to be kept alive, maybe 3♠ is best, followed by 4♥ over 3N, to pinpoint the diamond shortness (albeit you don't promise a void.. typically you'd be 6=2=1=4 for that sequence)

4♣ also helps with slam bidding IF partner has Jxx or better in clubs... xxx might work, but immediately reduces our chances of making. But 4♣ poses the real risk of endplaying partner in the auction. Would 4♦ by him simply be a punt? How likely is it that he can rebid hearts yet again? What would 4N be by him, and what is our call over it, no matter what it means?

My choice is 3♠, because so many good things can happen after it. At worst we play 4♠ instead of 4♥ and we rate to be safe if that is his choice.. he'll have a spade card because he didn't bid 3N. And if he bids 3N, my 4♥ is an umambiguous slam try justified by his apparent spade shortness.

I did this analysis without thinking about how the actual hand would play.. but what is so great about 6♣ on the actual hand, anyway? Say they lead a diamond. Are you going to hope both round suits are 3-2? Or try to establish spades?