[mr1303]

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding proceeded:

1S 2NT*
4S 5C
5H 6S

2NT was a Jacoby game forcing spade raise
4S showed a semi-balanced minimum (less than a strong NT with no singleton or void)
5C and 5H were both cue-bids.

Opening lead was a club. Trumps broke 3-1 onside (West held K10x) but declarer lost a trump trick after leading the queen (covered) then cashed the Jack. The club loser was unavoidable after the opening lead.

Who is most at fault?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

You dont want to play 6S, if it makes fine, but you
dont want to play there, so North going of is bad,
but not the main reason for the result.

The 5H cue is also fine, North already said he has
garbage, South investigated further, so North
cooperates, if he has a cue, he should make a cue
in this situation.

I dont like the opening, but that is a style question,
if this is ok, than South has to pass 4S, if not, even
than I think, going on after 4S is not an option.

So I think mainly South, North gets some blame,
if the opening was substandard, ... and of course
he went down, when he could have made it.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kfay]

I would not have opened the north hand, but I basically agree with every action afterwards. I guess that means I blame north.

[FrancesHinden]

Whether or not the North hand is an opening bid is a matter of partnership agreement.

South drove to slam opposite a (semi)-balanced minimum with the ace of hearts. That looks like an overbid to me, unless you think that North showed suitability with his cue bid. Given the methods and the style of opening, I think South should make one 5-level slam try and then give up.


The play in trumps was certainly not silly. It was picking up 2-2 with the king onside or singleton 10 offside; low to the jack picks up 2-2 with the king onside or singleton K onside (symmetrical) and run the queen, low to the 8 picks up K10x onside but loses to 10x offside; I think 10x offside is slightly more likely so the selected line is fine.

[the hog]

I would have opened the Nth hand. South is 100% to blame here. North has advertised a balanced min. Why should Sth push on to a slam on a hand that looks like being on a hook at best.

[Ant590]

No poll option for the methods failing, so I voted south for driving on after 4♠. I've never understood why pairs don't utilise a lower bid for balanced minimum, so responder can get his 17 count off his chest lower than 5♣.

[FrancesHinden]

The problem with the methods is that 'balanced minimum' here seems to mean a hand not strong enough to open a strong NT, so (assuming they open many 11-counts) that's anything from

Kxxxx
AJx
xx
QJx

(4S might go off on a bad day)

to

AKxxx
Axx
xx
Kxx

(6S just needs trumps not 4-0)

I didn't vote for "it's the methods" either, but perhaps that's the right answer.... Or opener can't call the second hand a minimum.

[han]

I also dislike the methods. We've all said many times before how bad this 4S rebid is, at least we are consistent.

[ArtK78]

If South knows that North might have opened this bad a hand, then South should pass 4♠.

North's hand is not an opening bid, but if the partnership allows this, then South must pass 4♠.

[mcphee]

S made a move with 5C and then shot out 6 when they got a H cue bid. S was bid out at this point and 5S does not end the bidding but does express doubt. I lay it on S even though I would not open the bidding.

[Codo]

Lets say that north is an old player. He just opens with 13 HCPs and at least 2,5 quick tricks.
Souths hand is still no good slam, So, as long as North opens solid, one more move and stopping in 5 Spade had been fine.
But opposite a normal modern opener, any move beyond 4 Spade was careless.

What hand shall partner have to make slam nice?

And Frances second example (f.e) is no hand which I would rate as a balanced minimum. Just aces and kings...

[jdonn]

Lots of blame to go around, but I give the opening bid the most.

[mr1303]

Hmm, a few differing opinions I see then.

A few comments to make:

1) Some people have suggested that South should make 1 slam try then give up. Presumably if one were to adopt this approach, the 5C bid would be agreed as the correct bid to make (if not then please suggest alternatives). Surely then if South (me incidentally) were to hear a 5H cue bid coming back, a 5S bid would say "We have 2 top diamond losers", i.e. a hand like:

KQxx
KQxx
xx
AKx

which would probably bid in a similar way up to 5C and want to sign off after the 5H cue.

How should one differentiate between a "I have a mild slam try" and a "I want to force to slam unless we have 2 top losers in a suit" in this situation?

2) Other posters have suggested that the 4S bid showing a balanced minimum is a poor method. We have decided that we want to keep the 2NT being game forcing (in other words no Limit + J2NT).

Our current methods after the 1S - J2NT are as follows:

3C/3D/3H = shortage (singleton or void, void will usually rebid the shortage if the auction continues in a suitable manner)
3S = (roughly) 18-19 balanced
3NT = (roughly) 15-17 balanced
4C/D/H = strong 2 suited hand with this 2nd suit
4S = semi-balanced minimum, roughly equivalent to a weak NT.

How then would you suggest continuing after 1S P 2NT?

[awm]

There are lots of versions of jacoby out there. In general the more complicated you get the more effective it can be. I'll give what Elianna and I play, because it's quite simple and still fixes the 4♠ jump problem:

1♠ - 2NT:

3♣, 3♦, 3♥ = shortness
----> Responder can bid 3NT "non-serious" if interested in slam only opposite extras
----> Responder can cuebid past 3NT if very interested in slam

3♠ = minimum, no shortness
----> Responder can bid 3NT if slam interest opposite a maximum in context
----> Responder can cuebid if interested in slam any time we are not off quick tricks
----> Responder can bid 4♠ to play

3NT = mild extras, no shortness (typically 15-17, or a bit less with 6♠)
----> Responder can cuebid if interested in slam
----> Responder can bid 4♠ with a dead minimum

4-level = cuebid, serious extras but no shortness (typically 18-20)

[jdonn]

Here is one:

3♣: 6+ spades
-->3♦: Relay
----->3♥: minimum
----->3♠: medium
----->3NT: maximum
3♦: 5 spades, minimum
3♥: 5 spades, medium
3♠: 5 spades, maximum

Over all those, next step asks for shortness, you can go none/low/middle/high.

3NT: Balanced minimum with 5 spades that is very notrump oriented.
4any: 5-5 like normal. If bid after 3♣ 3♦ you can play it shows 6511, or any 65 if you dare.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

The play in trumps was certainly not silly. It was picking up 2-2 with the king onside or singleton 10 offside; low to the jack picks up 2-2 with the king onside or singleton K onside (symmetrical) and run the queen, low to the 8 picks up K10x onside but loses to 10x offside; I think 10x offside is slightly more likely so the selected line is fine

Frances makes an analysis error for first time in ages?

Best play in trumps is low to the J. This picks up K/Kt/Kx/Kxx onside.
Running J then cash Q picks up KT/Kx/Kxx/KTxx, but stiff K is more common than KTxx onside. Not symmetrical, after low to J drops T on right you can cross again to finesse.

Running J then hook 8 picks up KT/Kxx/KTx/KTxx, but KTx < Kx and KTxx < K.

Low to 8 first is like the worst, losing to Kxx also.

As for the bidding, whether North can open is a style issue. But I don't think South should try for slam at all, I like 4M responses to Jacoby to be real dreck, the 5 level not necessarily safe. Reordering the response structure is best but if you want to keep the same one at least lower the ranges for all the bal/semi-balanced hands about 1.5 pts.

[kenrexford]

Responder.

If you have a big enough hyand where you are willing to go into the five-level, then bidding 2NT and receiving the expected 4♠ response seems pointless. What, you bid 2NT with the hope that the hand is easy but then resigning to an awkward 5♣ cue when it is not? Why not expect the difficult rebid and cater to it?

To me, 2NT was a bad bid, under the agreements. If Opener's 4♠ showed what it should show (I would not have opened this except that I have spades -- hope you make it), then Responder should pass, obviously. So, it either showed this, and South is a lunatic, or it did not, in which case 2NT was likely to lead to this absurd sequence.

I have no idea how the auction would proceed with this partnership after a simple 2/1 call, but I cannot imagine that it would be this bad.

[junyi_zhu]

mr1303, on Oct 8 2008, 06:58 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

Bidding proceeded:

1S 2NT*
4S 5C
5H 6S

2NT was a Jacoby game forcing spade raise
4S showed a semi-balanced minimum (less than a strong NT with no singleton or void)
5C and 5H were both cue-bids.

Opening lead was a club. Trumps broke 3-1 onside (West held K10x) but declarer lost a trump trick after leading the queen (covered) then cashed the Jack. The club loser was unavoidable after the opening lead.

Who is most at fault?

The worst bid is actually 6S. For south's hand, 5C is an overbid, which still may win in some layouts, for example: partner may hold AKxxxx Ax Jx xxx, in that case 6S is quite cold. North's opening is certainly light, but with two aces, it's just a small overbid as well. The worst bid is 6S. South's hand isn't strong enough to push to slam facing a minimum, and partner's 5H shows a H control, so now it's time for south to retreat to 5S and let partner decide. There is no way for south to push to slam facing any minimum balanced hand with a heart control, which is actually a frequent mistake by many intermediate to advanced bidders.

[awm]

junyi_zhu, on Oct 14 2008, 03:56 PM, said:

The worst bid is actually 6S. For south's hand, 5C is an overbid, which still may win in some layouts, for example: partner may hold AKxxxx Ax Jx xxx, in that case 6S is quite cold. North's opening is certainly light, but with two aces, it's just a small overbid as well. The worst bid is 6S. South's hand isn't strong enough to push to slam facing a minimum, and partner's 5H shows a H control, so now it's time for south to retreat to 5S and let partner decide. There is no way for south to push to slam facing any minimum balanced hand with a heart control, which is actually a frequent mistake by many intermediate to advanced bidders.

But suppose north held:

♠AKxxx
♥Axx
♦Jx
♣xxx

Another minimum, but this time slam happens to be virtually cold. You're suggesting an auction like:

1♠ - 2N
4♠ - 5♣
5♥ - 5♠

But obviously north has to pass this; you could be off two top tricks in diamonds opposite for example:

♠QJxxx
♥KQx
♦xx
♣AKQ

It seems clear to me that the actual problem was much earlier in the auction than the 5♣/5♥ sequence. Perhaps given the methods (i.e. opener will jump to 4♠ over jacoby with a balanced minimum) it would've been better to respond 2♦ in the first place.

[jdonn]

awm, on Oct 14 2008, 05:55 PM, said:

junyi_zhu, on Oct 14 2008, 03:56 PM, said:

The worst bid is actually 6S. For south's hand, 5C is an overbid, which still may win in some layouts, for example: partner may hold AKxxxx Ax Jx xxx, in that case 6S is quite cold. North's opening is certainly light, but with two aces, it's just a small overbid as well. The worst bid is 6S. South's hand isn't strong enough to push to slam facing a minimum, and partner's 5H shows a H control, so now it's time for south to retreat to 5S and let partner decide. There is no way for south to push to slam facing any minimum balanced hand with a heart control, which is actually a frequent mistake by many intermediate to advanced bidders.

But suppose north held:

♠AKxxx
♥Axx
♦Jx
♣xxx

Another minimum, but this time slam happens to be virtually cold. You're suggesting an auction like:

1♠ - 2N
4♠ - 5♣
5♥ - 5♠

But obviously north has to pass this; you could be off two top tricks in diamonds opposite for example:

♠QJxxx
♥KQx
♦xx
♣AKQ

I do not agree, the odds of being off two top diamonds are so tiny they are vanishingly close to zero. The bidding has to be quantitative on some level of thinking. North should say to himself, I have AK of trumps and an A and partner has forced to the 5 level to try for slam opposite a balanced minimum, I should clearly be going as partner would not in practice be forcing to the five level off AK A AK.

Your example hand is an obvious pass of 4♠ (about equally as obvious as the actual hand).