[Ant590]

Scoring: IMP

---

edit: [huge typo, I initially put ♠ not ♥, apologies]
1♥ - 2♥
4♣ - ?

What would you choose here. You have no agreement about LTTC, and partner requested that you play first round controls (no discussion about bending them with less space).

[dicklont]

Why did I bid 2♠, there is nothing wrong with a normal 1NT, is there?

Anyway 4♠ now, I have no cuebids at four level and no reason to go higher.

[Fluffy]

4♠ because I cannot bid 3NT nor 3♠ now.

[kenrexford]

So confused.

1. Why raise on 2-card, and not even Kx?
2. Why cuebid at all after a splinter in the wrong suit?
3. Why Aces First?
4. Why would the weak hand even want to use LTTC?

[mtvesuvius]

Why did I raise on 2 small spades?!? Give that I made this horrible bid, 4♠ wtp? I have wasted ♣ values, I have only 2♠ and otherwise I have garbage. Why would I ever want to bid anything else here?

[Codo]

I guess the auction started with 1 ♥ 2 ♥ else this is a non problem.

Now I try 4 Heart, I have no first round control, my honours are bad placed...

When the auction started with 1 ♠ 2 ♠.. I now bid 6 NT to have a consistent quality in my bids.

[helene_t]

Don't forget to redouble, Roland

[mtvesuvius]

Codo, on Jan 16 2009, 09:08 AM, said:

I now bid 6 NT to have a consistent quality in my bids.

LOL

[Ant590]

Sorry everyone - it was 1♥ - 2♥ - 4♣, a massive typo

[mtvesuvius]

Now I bid 4♥, I have no controls, and my clubs are wasted.

[kenrexford]

Well, that's better.

OK. Partner bid 4♣, a call that all are assuming to be a shortness bid. He had the option, presumably, of bidding 3♦ or 2♠, or maybe even 2NT, first, before a follow-up cue sequence.

Any of these would allow us to cue the club Ace if he cared. By opting the one call that eliminates our ability to cue clubs, he fairly certainly is indicating that he does not care much about that card.

I cannot understand the idea of "Aces First" in a sequence like this. Opener has opted to paint a picture. He needs Responder to have his cards in spades, diamonds, and trumps. Allowing Responder one call, that he has the diamond Ace, seems silly here. The diamond King, and perhaps the diamond Queen, are equally important cards, as are spade and trump cards.

So, it seems that LTTC should be on. With three covers (three cards including any of the A-K-Q of any of these suits), Responder clearly has enough. With two, or with something approximating two, a "bump" seems called for.

All said, this is sort of close to a "bump," actually. I like the doubleton spade, as that might be a cover. The diamond King is clearly a cover. The club Ace might also be a cover, maybe.

Give Opener, for example, ♠Axx ♥AKQxxx ♦Axx ♣--. After a trump lead, for example, Opener plays Ace and a spade. A trump continuation is not enough. Opener wins, crosses to the diamond Ace, ruffs a spade, cashes the club Ace to pitch a diamond, pulls trumps, and claims.

So, if 4♦ says "I have something interesting," maybe you do have it.

[keylime]

LTTC should never ever be bid by a hand that has already limited themselves in the bidding. Additionally, as a former, rehab'ed LTTC player (hello, my name is Dwayne, and I have a problem...I think every 4D bid when hearts agreed as trumps as a LTTC bid), I would never play this treatment unless a 2/1 had been established.

[foo]

Ant590, on Jan 16 2009, 08:05 AM, said:

North,None,IMP,
♠T9 ♥954 ♦K95 ♣AJ743

1♥ - 2♥
4♣ - ??

What would you choose here. You have no agreement about LTTC, and partner requested that you play first round controls (no discussion about bending them with less space).

You have a flat 9 loser hand opposite a presumably 5 loser hand that does not care about your ♣ cards.

5/8 of your values are ♣ cards. That's Bad News.
If your goal is to only bid 50+% slams, pard is going to need a huge hand for this to be enough.

Bid 4H and be glad you resisted the temptation to push Us to the 5 level.

[HeavyDluxe]

*trying to keep a straight face* Sorry, 4♣ is obviously gerber.

Ok, ok... In all seriousness: 4♣ is showing shortness, and trashes my hand. I bid 4♥.

[jdonn]

I have an ace though not in the best suit but still an ace, a working king, and a potentially good doubleton. Against that the trumps are bad. I would bid 4♦ with a partner I can trust to not bid blackwood or something simply because I cuebid, unless he has a good reason. Certainly if partner signs off over that I am done. I would only make this cuebid below game, so for example if partner bid 4♦ and my minors were reversed I would not force to the 5 level. Bad trumps always make the 5 level risky.

I enjoy the logic that 5/8 of our strength is wasted in clubs. I guess our hand would be better without the club jack at all, since then only 4/7 of our strength would be wasted, which is less than 5/8!

Has the hand been changing since prior comments? Someone said we have no controls? An ace and a king for a simple raise does not look like no controls to me.

[kenrexford]

keylime, on Jan 16 2009, 10:17 AM, said:

LTTC should never ever be bid by a hand that has already limited themselves in the bidding.

A simple raise has a fairly wide range. This is especially wide when a shortness bid is made.

[blackshoe]

HeavyDluxe, on Jan 16 2009, 11:36 AM, said:

*trying to keep a straight face* Sorry, 4♣ is obviously gerber.

Ok, ok... In all seriousness: 4♣ is showing shortness, and trashes my hand. I bid 4♥.

4♣ is always Gerber.

1♣-4♣ Gerber
1♣-2♣-4♣ Gerber
4♣ Gerber
etc.

[mtvesuvius]

blackshoe, on Jan 16 2009, 12:04 PM, said:

HeavyDluxe, on Jan 16 2009, 11:36 AM, said:

*trying to keep a straight face*  Sorry, 4♣ is obviously gerber. 

Ok, ok... In all seriousness:  4♣ is showing shortness, and trashes my hand.  I bid 4♥.

4♣ is always Gerber.

1♣-4♣ Gerber
1♣-2♣-4♣ Gerber
4♣ Gerber
etc.

Don't forget the 4♣ openings, and (3x) - 4♣ is ofc Gerber too :lol:

[Phil]

foo, on Jan 16 2009, 10:18 AM, said:

Ant590, on Jan 16 2009, 08:05 AM, said:

North,None,IMP,
♠T9 ♥954 ♦K95 ♣AJ743

1♥ - 2♥
4♣ - ??

What would you choose here. You have no agreement about LTTC, and partner requested that you play first round controls (no discussion about bending them with less space).

You have a flat 9 loser hand opposite a presumably 5 loser hand that does not care about your ♣ cards.

5/8 of your values are ♣ cards. That's Bad News.
If your goal is to only bid 50+% slams, pard is going to need a huge hand for this to be enough.

Bid 4H and be glad you resisted the temptation to push Us to the 5 level.

Since when does a five loser hand like:

Axx
AKQxxx
Qxx
x

start making slam tries opposite a single raise. Is 2♥ inverted or something?

Pard rates to have a much better hand; something more like:

Axx
AKJxxxx
Ax
x

Whatever pard interprets 4♦ as, I'm happy. Yes, I think LTTC should apply in this sequence, if only to keep things consistent with other Last Train auctions.

[jdonn]

Phil, on Jan 16 2009, 01:03 PM, said:

Whatever pard interprets 4♦ as, I'm happy. Yes, I think LTTC should apply in this sequence, if only to keep things consistent with other Last Train auctions.

I agree this is a perfect LTTC hand. We want to say we have some interest, but don't want to go beyond game. When I answered I was answering with 4♦ being a cuebid.