[mikeh]

Q7542 A3 void AKJ953

Red v white, imps, expert opps and partner. You play a fairly basic walsh style 2/1. Partner deals and passes.

 P   [P]   1♣   [P]
1♠ [1N]  ?

Your bidding plan?

I will later post what the opps do (I know what they did after my choice, and I suspect I know what they will do after almost any plausible call)

[rogerclee]

4D planning to pass a 4S bid from partner.

[Apollo81]

rogerclee, on Oct 20 2008, 12:07 PM, said:

4D planning to pass a 4S bid from partner.

Agree.

Some people here have the agreement that 3♦ is either an invitational to game splinter or a strong slam try splinter (stronger than 4♦). This hand is a good example of the latter, and I would use that if I had that agreement.

[pclayton]

4♦ puts pard in an untenable position. Considering ♠Axxxx / ♥Q gives us an excellent slam, I wouldn't expect pard to cooperate over 4♦.

I'll start with 3♦ and I will bid 4♣ over 3♠, although I think Mike plays Serious 3N, so that would be my choice.

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Oct 20 2008, 11:16 AM, said:

4♦ puts pard in an untenable position. Considering ♠Axxxx / ♥Q gives us an excellent slam, I wouldn't expect pard to cooperate over 4♦.

I'll start with 3♦ and I will bid 4♣ over 3♠, although I think Mike plays Serious 3N, so that would be my choice.

With this partner, we play non-serious 3N IF we have established the major suit fit at the 3-level.... so if we were to bid, for example, 3♦ and hear 3♥, 3♠ would trigger a non-serious 3N scenario.

It may be no surprise to learn that this scheme will not eventuate.. rho has shown a red two suiter and we hold this hand at unfavourable But I will defer further comment for the nonce.

[ArtK78]

A 5♠ bid here is not out of line. Since there are 2 unbid suits, 5♠ can only ask about trump quality - raise one level for each top trump honor you hold.

The worst case scenario would be that partner has Kxxx of spades and no ♥K or ♥Q. In that case, a heart lead might beat 6♠ immediately. However, if you avoid the heart lead (and not showing diamond shortness is one way to avoid getting a heart lead) partner will have a reasonable chance to make slam.

Of course, if partner's trump holding is better than Kxxx, the chances of making slam are much better.

I am hoping that partner does not have xxx in clubs.

[rogerclee]

I think the point of this hand is to shut the opponents out more than to find a magic slam opp Axxxx Qxx xxx xx which is not even that good of a slam assuming RHO is 5-5.

[FrancesHinden]

Apollo81, on Oct 20 2008, 05:10 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Oct 20 2008, 12:07 PM, said:

4D planning to pass a 4S bid from partner.

Agree.

Some people here have the agreement that 3♦ is either an invitational to game splinter or a strong slam try splinter (stronger than 4♦). This hand is a good example of the latter, and I would use that if I had that agreement.

Some people have the agreement that 3D shows a singleton, and 4D a void.
With that agreement, I bid 4D, and will follow it up (if I am allowed to) with 4NT which must now exclude diamonds.

Of course, the problem with this scheme is it is going to generate a heart lead.

Alternatively, we could go with the bashful approach and bid 5NT, grand slam force in spades. That has a simple appeal to it, although it has the possible downsides of getting to a small slam off the AK of trumps, or with A/Kxxx opposite Qxxxx. At least then I know which hand has the singleton ace... It has the plus side of getting to 7S quickly opposite AKxx.

All right, I'm going to bid 2NT if that shows a good spade raise, and see what happens next (if it doesn't show a good spade raise, what do you think it does show?)

[Walddk]

4♦ (void) with my favourite partner. 3♦ would be a singleton, not game-forcing. Over LHO's 5♦ partner should be in a pretty good position to judge what is right for us.

Roland

[han]

I was hoping Frances would bid 5NT.

[Cascade]

4♦ showing a void for me.

As for Phil's hand: I think partner with ♠Axxxx and ♥ Qx should move over this. Over my splinters I expect partner with a minimum with nothing wasted to do something constructive.

[Echognome]

I'm not saying we would bid this, but would people play 4♣ as showing a solid club suit and 4-card support? I would bid 3♦ followed by 4♣. If partner bid 4♥, then I would bid 5♦ to show my void.

[benlessard]

4D, WTP. If partner hold 2 or 3 of the magic cards we will the good slam. Holding only 1 of slam is marginal.

[mikeh]

If you invoke the bashful approach of 5N, LHO bids 6♦ (I think... but I did not choose the call so can't be certain, but I know LHo reasonably well and I think that would be his call, if only to see if we knew what we were doing over interference)

Partner passes to promise either the A or the K, but to deny the Queen


If you try 5♠, partner will take this as trump asking and will bid 6♠ whether LHO bids 6♦ or passes.

If you try any artificial raise of spades, LHO will bid 5♦. Partner passes, which is not so much encouraging as it is not discouraging... double would be a strong expression of disinterest.

I chose a simple splinter because I didn't want to reveal the void and direct a heart lead... and I did so knowing that we might end up with my being unable to keycard meaningfully... but secretly hoping for a double of 3♦, to allow partner to redouble with the Ace, and thus, when he didn't, to be able to use keycard.

Anyway, 5♦ comes back to you... your call.

[han]

Having bid 3D it is a simple 5H no?

[FrancesHinden]

mikeh, on Oct 21 2008, 06:06 AM, said:

If you invoke the bashful approach of 5N, LHO bids 6♦ (I think... but I did not choose the call so can't be certain, but I know LHo reasonably well and I think that would be his call, if only to see if we knew what we were doing over interference)

Partner passes to promise either the A or the K, but to deny the Queen

That's impressive. I don't know what my agreements are if they come in over GSF.

I assume that my 2NT good spade raise is also generating 5D on my right.

Anyway, we have learnt something (whether we bid 3D or 2NT or 4D) - we have learnt that partner has some vague interest. Now I can bid GSF slightly more confidently.

Sounds as if I am in 6S with two trump losers opposits Axxx, or in 6S with no trump losers opposite Axxxxxx.

[pclayton]

Some sort of stolen bid (or maybe DPPO) sequence probably applies over GSF interference. Maybe Meckwell has discussed this - I doubt if anyone else has.

Agree with Han: I feel very well placed after 3♦ and have an easy 5♥. Once pard shows a little life, 6 looks certain.

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Oct 21 2008, 10:24 AM, said:

Some sort of stolen bid (or maybe DPPO) sequence probably applies over GSF interference. Maybe Meckwell has discussed this - I doubt if anyone else has.

Agree with Han: I feel very well placed after 3♦ and have an easy 5♥. Once pard shows a little life, 6 looks certain.

We actually haven't discussed interference over GSF. We do, however, have a general rule about non jump interference over step-response asking bids, of which we play quite a few. So we have a generic rule for such interference. Double (or redouble) is the first step, pass is the second step, etc. So, since we play step responses to GSF, it is logical, at the table, to apply our default rule. The drawback is that in this partnership, we only ever discussed the steps to GSF once, and it has never come up

[rogerclee]

Bidding GSF seems, well, dumb. For starters partner could easily have none of them. Why are we just going to take a significant risk of getting to 6 off the AK of trumps when we have so much room to explore anyways?

Secondly, but less importantly, slam is often going to be anti percentage opposite 1 keycard. We can often diagnose when we want to be in slam opposite 1 keycard by going slower and letting partner cooperate with those hands, and stay out of the other ones. Sure we will miss some marginal/good slams this way, but we will get to the good/very good ones and stay out of the terrible ones.

Third, opposite the AK of trumps we should be able to get to 7 no matter what we do.