[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

---

1H-2NT!
3C!-3D!
4D!-??
 
1H=5 card Majors
2NT=4+card H and 10+HCP (no singleton if 10-14)
3C=15-17HCP
3D=asking
4D=singleton D
 
Do you agree with 2NT or would you first bid 1S?
What now; 4S will be taken as 1st/2nd control bid by your partner

[mikeh]

I dislike the method... here we are at the level of 4♦ and we know almost nothing about his shape.. and shape plus location of hcp are key to a final contract.

This is because of 2 factors: one is the system, which I think is ineffective.. at least on this auction... I really don't like methods that have, as an early priority in a suit-based auction, the need to show a range of hcp.

The second is the dubious choice of assuming captaincy as responder, rather than responding 1♠ and then later showing a gf raise in hearts... I am sure that you could do this below the 4 level, and then opener will be in a position to either assume captaincy or embark upon a dialogue.

As it is, I can't see how we can sign off here... we should usually have safety at the 5-level... surely he won't often hold xxx AKxxx x AKQJ.... of course, because our first call got him to give a walter the walrus response, maybe he has xxx AJxxx K AQJx

[cherdano]

I would bid 4♠. It is actually tempting to just RKCB and not help them with the lead, but I am willing to stop in 5♥ if partner doesn't get excited.

[pclayton]

cherdano, on Sep 18 2008, 04:37 PM, said:

I would bid 4♠. It is actually tempting to just RKCB and not help them with the lead, but I am willing to stop in 5♥ if partner doesn't get excited.

Same here. I'd rather pard bid 4N, and 4♠ doesn't commit us to anything.

[rogerclee]

I'm with claydano.

[jdonn]

I'm with claydonno.

[kenrexford]

Partner could have a primo hand, like ♠KQxx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣Axxx.

Partner could have a lousy hand, like ♠KQJx ♥AKJxx ♦x ♣QJx.

Partner could have a death hand, like ♠Qxxx ♥AKJxx ♦Q ♣Kxx.

I also dislike the methods. We have bunched too much into 2NT, for starters. We are showing HCP's, which is so insanely grandpa for what seems to be an attempt to be modern. We have an auction where the wrong partner is asking questions and has captaincy, wasting space to accomplish that undesirable goal.

Goven the methods, I have an average hand with lots of wasted honors. My diamonds are not even long enough to dummy reverse this hand. I have a bonus side spade suit, which is nice, but no way to show it or to ask the necessary questions. So, I sign off and prepare for the discussion after the game about how we ended up with this ugly convention on our card.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Sep 18 2008, 09:45 PM, said:

Partner could have a primo hand, like ♠KQxx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣Axxx.

The 14th card makes it extra primo.

Quote

Partner could have a lousy hand, like ♠KQJx ♥AKJxx ♦x ♣QJx.

The extra jack of spades makes this one even better!

Quote

Partner could have a death hand, like ♠Qxxx ♥AKJxx ♦Q ♣Kxx.

He would deserve his death if he had to count singleton queen as 2 to reach 15-17.

Come on Ken, you gotta work on your examples!

Seriously I think the method is fine as long as we aren't taking "15-17 hcp" too literally. If we just think of it as 'medium range hand' or 'king (ace?) better than an opener' or something, it's fine. In fact Justin and I used to play a similar method, except we would have shown the same with a 3♠ bid instead of 4♦. I think you would reach a different conclusion if you considered more shapes. For example hands like Kx AKxxxx x Axxx etc.

[kfay]

When partner can have less than he says he has and grand is still on a hook I'm going to bid on.

4♠

[OleBerg]

Agree with 2nt.

It is very clumsy though, to show a singleton as the last step below game. I'd really love to be able to make a slam-try below game.

As it is, I bid 4♠.

[kgr]

Thanks all for the answers.
- If partner is minimum in HCP then he will not have ♦K or ♦Q, not sure if he would show the singleton with ♦A or ♦J in that case (..not possible here).
- I thought I needed better ♠ to bid 1♠ first and then GF in ♥. At least ♠AQTxx
- I signed off in 4♥ which clearly wasn't good.
Both hans were:

---

Making 7;
1H-2NT
3C-3D
4D-4H
All pass
 
1H=5 card Majors
2NT=4+card H and 10+HCP (no singleton if 10-14)
3C=15-17HCP
3D=asking
4D=singleton D

[kenrexford]

kgr, on Sep 19 2008, 04:09 PM, said:

Both hans were...

How can you expect this auction to work out with two hans at the table? LOLOLOL

[han]

I think they would get to the top spot virtually always.