[jillybean]

Dealer: West Vul: EW Scoring: IMP

♠ AT76 ♥ KQJ73 ♦ Q94 ♣ 7

West North East South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♦
 Pass  3♥    Pass  4♣
 Pass  4♦    Pass  4NT (0314)
 Pass  5♣    Pass  6♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

Playing with a good partner who can play the cards, is 6 too much?

[blackshoe]

Probably. OTOH, once you bid 4NT, you're not likely to be able to stop below 6. I wonder if 4♠ (instead of 4NT) would have been better?

[cherdano]

Why did you bid 4♣ rather than 3♠?
Anyway, I would just bid 4♥ over 3♥. Of course, slam will make opposite perfect minima, but I don't have a descriptive slam try.

[han]

I think it is good to look for slam after the 3H bid. If the hands fit well then you are likely to make it.

I don't understand the 4C bid. I'm not saying it is a bad bid but I just don't understand what made you bid 4C instead of 3S. Did you think it showed shortness?

[jdonn]

6 was not too much. You have no losers off the top and partner superaccepted, I definitely expect good play most of the time. To put it another way, why did you bid keycard if you were not going to bid (at least) slam when you have all the keycards?

Yes 4♣ was a weird bid.

[inquiry]

You know 15 of your partners 15-17 hcp. Which 15? The three aces he showed by bidding 5♣ and the spade king HE MUST hold to cue-bid 4♦ once you bypassed 3♠ (presumably denying a control in spades....

So he is something like the following but with a black queen.

Kx(x)
Axxx
Ax(x)
Ax(x)

He needs the black queen for his "super accept".. the diamond king is too much (but he might have two jacks I guess). If he has the club queen, he needs a doubleton king of spades for a play. If he has the queen of spades, you will need to hold your diamond losers to one.

So the best you can hope for here is.... something like

KQx Axxx Ax Axxx in which 6 hearts is a good contract (diamond king on sides, or find spade jack, or spades 3-3, or hearts 2-2, or hearts 3-1 with the fellow with 3 hearts having 4 spades).

Kx Axxx Axx AQxx (a good contract, assuming you can ruff 1 spade low and second with ACE).

Kxx Axxx Axx AQx, contract really has no play, etc.

I use to play all bids by responder here cue-bids, like your 4♣ bid. But better now is responder shows second suit. If opener's maximum fits well for the two suits shown, he can continue towards slam. Imagine simple hand for opener, the first one (KQx of spades), over 3♠ he will drive to slam. Now change your black suits, so you hold ATxx of clubs. Now you bid 4♣. Opener with KQx of spades would not be so excited. But change his hand to KQx of clubs instead of spades, and again he drives. Keep this thought in mind when you necessarily think ah ha, we should start cue-bidding now. Shape is still very important to determine how well hands fit, something cue-bidding does not necessarily show.

[cherdano]

inquiry, on Aug 5 2008, 07:38 PM, said:

You know 15 of your partners 15-17 hcp. Which 15? The three aces he showed by bidding 5♣ and the spade king HE MUST hold to cue-bid 4♦ once you bypassed 3♠ (presumably denying a control in spades....

So he is something like the following but with a black queen.

Kx(x)
Axxx
Ax(x)
Ax(x)

He needs the black queen for his "super accept"..

I would always superaccept with KAAA, four trumps and 4432.

[jillybean]

4♣ I intended as a cue, i forgot it shows my second suit.

[han]

Why did you cue clubs instead of spades?

[jillybean]

I dont have a good answer for that

[Mbodell]

In a regular partnership it might be worth talking about what other super accept bids mean (2♠ through 3♥) as you may have a better chance of having a good slam auction if you know more about the openers hand since opener skipped a level.

I'm not sure there is a standard agreement for those bids absent discussion (2nd suit? concentration of values? stopper ask for nt?), but I play 2nt as showing 2 top hearts, 4 hearts total, and enough quick tricks outside to super accept (2 when playing weak nt, 2.5-3 playing strong) and the other suit bids show 1 top heart, 4 hearts, and 0.5-1 more quick tricks outside than the 2nt super accept with the cheapest quick trick in the suit bid. So 2♠ promises a spade quick trick and 2.5-3 outside quick tricks and 4 hearts headed by one of AKQ. 3♣ denies a spade quick trick but promises a club one and the same strength as 2♠ super accept. 3♥ then shows any 5 card heart suit, since we bid 1NT when 5332 (and occasionally on awkward 5422), and this exposes the 5 card suit.

I imagine you bid the 4♣ because in your mind you were planing on self splintering over 1nt-2♦-2♥-4♣ and bid the same way over the 3♥. I think that is an understandable mistake, but as others point out your chances for partner being able to help with skill versus luck at placing the contract left once you didn't bid 3♠. But still with him having 3 key cards and at worse Kxx of spades I think you are left as 6♥ as the best guess. My guess is partner has, at worst, Kx Axxx Axx AQxx which has play but isn't a great slam, and partner may have better.

[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♦
 Pass  3♥    Pass  4♣
 Pass  4♦    Pass  4NT
 Pass  5♣    Pass  6♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

This was the full hand

[brianshark]

You need 4 trumps to super-accept. It's a pretty specific requirement.

[mikeh]

jillybean2, on Aug 6 2008, 09:27 AM, said:

Dealer: West Vul: EW Scoring: IMP

♠ 98 ♥ AT4 ♦ AKT ♣ AQT43 ♠ AT76 ♥ KQJ73 ♦ Q94 ♣ 7

West  North East  South

 Pass  1NT   Pass  2♦
 Pass  3♥    Pass  4♣
 Pass  4♦    Pass  4NT
 Pass  5♣    Pass  6♥
 Pass  Pass  Pass  

This was the full hand

Opener made two errors, the second being an attempt (even if only unconsciously) to rectify the first.

The hand is too strong for a 15-17 1N. Admittedly, the spade holding would make a jump to 2N unpleasant after a red suit response to 1♣, but when the opps are silent and partner has yet to deny spades or limit her hand, 2N is the most descriptive call. Why is 1♣ inadequate?

We hold 17 hcp but that metric gives no weight to the good 5 card suit... AQ10xx is a MUCH better holding than AQ32, yet counting them as 6 hcp each values them the same way.

We hold 7 controls! While in itself this is not a huge deal, the 4321 count undervalues controls... I would place this hand at close to 18 hcp even if it were 4432 with no tens.

We hold 3 tens, and those tens are supported by higher honours... A10x opposite Jx is a good holding if we are on play and the opps attack the suit: compare to Axx opposite Jx..usually a full trick difference, yet we count them the same way using the 4321 scale. And in our long suit: compare AQ10xx opposite Jxx to AQxxx opposite Jxx.

So opener underbid with 1N and then tried to catch up by lying about the 4th trump. On the actual hand, that didn't matter because responder had great trump.

The 4♣ call was weird, as others have said. I wouldn't worry about 'showing your other suit'... sometimes you won't have one. So I would bid 3♠ as a cue.

BTW, while there is a (strong) expert school of thought that one's first slam move should be in a long(ish) suit, there are others who think that once trump is agreed, we should cue up the line... some would cue 1st then 2nd round, but I think the majority would cue 1st or 2nd, whichever were more convenient. This is, in my view, easier to learn and to play, even tho I think that the first school has a theoretical edge.

However, as a general rule, it is preferable to begin cuebidding with highcard controls, so as to allow partner to better evaluate (an obvious splinter is an exception, but partner knows what to expect). As it is, 4♣ should be the club K, which enhances opener's club suit but, and this is a very big but, 4♣ denies a spade control. We would not bypass even a second round spade control to cue a second round club control. Thus opener 'knows' that the partnership is off two spade tricks and should shut the bidding down via 4♥, even tho he has a diamond control.

Finally, the responding hand is ideal for a convention known as Smolen: use stayman and, if opener bids 2♦, jump into the 4 card major.. forcing to game, with 4 cards in that suit and longer in the other major. If opener bids 2Major, then with this hand you could splinter if you chose.. I think it is borderline to look for 6♠ if that is your fit, but looking for 6♥ is probably fairly clear... looking, not forcing.

[jtfanclub]

Just because I'm curious...didja make it?

[kenrexford]

mikeh, on Aug 6 2008, 10:57 AM, said:

[good analysis]

I agree with what Mike says here. I would even take it further, though.

One good evaluation tool for balanced hands, to assess the real value of the cards, is to mutliple the number of controls (A=2, K=1) by 3 1/3. Here, that gives 23 1/3. You then subtract the HCP count (here 17), yielding a number (here, 6 1/3). If that number is -1 and 2/3 through +1 and 2/3, no adjustment. If the number is +2 to +6, add 1. if the number is +6 to +9, add two. If +9 or higher, add 3. If negative by this degree, deduct points.

Now, this is not strict, but it gives you a starting point. Q quick look at this hand with that tool yields a 19-count.

Then, you can check this result for "good cause." "Good cause" might be a good five-card suit (check) and/or any 10 that has not been counted as worth any HCP (got that 3X over).

This hand, then, is a powerhouse. Its playing strength is closer to a 2NT opening than a 1NT opening. If I had to pick 1NT or 2NT, I would actually pick 2NT.

Now, evaluating all of these adjustments up might be a bit much if taken to extremes, but this hand does not even slightly resemble a 17-count.

On the other hand, I don't have a general problem with super-accepting with three-piece suits. I think that this "must have four" rule is too simplistic.

I agree 100% that this hand looks better for a Smolen sequence, especially if (1) three of the other major and other higher calls are slam tries for a major that Opener bids, (2) delayed Texas is on to distinguish weak 6-4 from stronger 6-4, and (3) you have a good set of options for when Opener has three-card support for your major, like Mathe (next up non-3NT asks for the stiff, if any).

[jillybean]

No we didnt make it however other tables did. I agree and see why 4♣ is odd, maybe I wont do that again for a while. More partnership agreements needed, thanks for the replies

[neilkaz]

Nice thread here. First of all, the opening hand has some many plusses and is so good for suit play(and also for NT if not defeated in ♠) that I think it's clearly too good for 1NT, and I am conservative about upgrading. I'd open 1♣ and rebid 2NT.

But having opened 1NT, I do super accept as this hand in spite of 3 trumps, really seems worth 19 pts in support of ♥. My purpose in super accepting (and I know most won't do it with three trumps, but this is an exceptional hand and with good 3 card support,17++ HCP, and the needed ruffing value) is to get to a game that will be missed if PD has 6 or 7 HCP or even a ratty 8 and fails to invite.

As shown here, the super accept also aids in us getting to a slam we'd never bid otherwise after 1NT. Is it a good slam ? Well it is an OK slam, but responder could have a bit more, giving slam great chances, and we'd likely stop in 4♥ without the super accept.

Sometimes the super accept on the super max 1NT with good 3 card support and a doubleton may get too high when responder has a bust, but perhaps 3♥-1 scores better than the contract the opps would bid and make after we stop in 2♥.

Anyhow, this super accepting is moot to me since I think the hand is clearly too strong for 1NT.

Responder's pursuit of slam is aggressive but OK after the super accept, IMHO, and as we all know, the proper bid after 3♥ is to Q-bid the ♠.

Getting back to super accepts, I have never seen a method for opener I like ! Jumping to the 3 level takes up too much room, IMHO. Some super accept by bidding a doubleton, but that can aid defence also, and I don't care to tell the opps that I have a doubleton ♠ when ♥ is trumps with a big fit and pave the road to their 4♠ sac. (Said sac is not an issue at this vul, but with vuls reversed it is a nuisance). I think the best method to super accept starts with 2NT for most any near max super accept to save room for responder to continue without getting too high, but don't have a really good method to follow up.

Just my opinions .. neilkaz ..