[inquiry]

---

[zasanya]

I like to play 4 way transfer.A transfer to Major followed by minor (Major longer than minor or equal length 5-5) OR a transfer to minor followed by Major ( minor always longer) suggests slam.NT opener bids 4 minor to initiate cue bidding or bids a new suit as cue bid setting major as trumps.OR bids game directly if not interested in slam.

[JLOL]

I would just blast 6S.

[Mbodell]

I play 4♥ then 5♣ is exclusion, so I'd try that. If you are assuming a pick up partnership with no discussion then maybe 2♥-4♣ is safer. I don't mind the direct 6♠ either, but I'd rather try for science if I can.

[whereagles]

5 losers, opposite an expectancy of 4 cover cards. Slam is mandatory.

Unless you have methods that allow you to probe for 7, WITHOUT MESSING UP, just bid 6♠.

[mtvesuvius]

4♥ texas, followed by 5♣ exclusion for me. Otherwise I blast 6♠.

[jdonn]

I jacoby transfer and bid 3♦. I'm much more comfortable bidding exclusion if partner has shown spade support first, and if he doesn't have it then I don't want to since I'm on a guess for the grand if we are off the queen (Ax or Axx?)

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Apr 2 2009, 10:24 AM, said:

I jacoby transfer and bid 3♦. I'm much more comfortable bidding exclusion if partner has shown spade support first, and if he doesn't have it then I don't want to since I'm on a guess for the grand if we are off the queen (Ax or Axx?)

agree

[awm]

I would go with 4♥...exclusion.

While it's certainly nice to know whether partner has three spades, there are a number of sequences where bidding diamonds will make things a lot harder. For example:

1NT-2♥-2♠-3♦-3NT.

Okay, partner (probably) has only two spades. But what is your call now? Presumably 4♠ is to play, 4NT is quantitative, 4-round sounds like patterning out, etc. You can bid 5♣ anyway, but it doesn't seem obvious what suit this is exclusion for. You can blast 6♠ but partner could easily have the goods for a grand or you could be off two cashing aces.

1NT-2♥-2♠-3♦-4♦.

Here partner might even have three spades. But it seems like diamonds have been set as trump. If (like me) you suspect that spades is the better trump suit you may have some issues. Keycard now will be in diamonds, and 4♠ will likely be read as a non-forcing 6-4. I suppose you can bid 5♣ (if this is exclusion for diamonds and not a cue) and then try to sign off in spades (if this will be viewed as to play and not some sort of choice of grands) but the auction seems a lot murkier.

[oldman5757]

JLOL, on Apr 2 2009, 01:42 AM, said:

I would just blast 6S.

Agree. There is just too much to find out. Does P have ♠AQ, ♥ A?, ♦ K? Wasted ♣ values? Exclusion, even if executed correctly with both P's on the same page, doesn't decisively solve all of these problems. Not to mention that opponents may yet interfere.

I am much more worried about an overly complex auction leading to a hopeless 6NT or 7 ♠ than I am about whether P has the perfecto that might let us make 7 ♠, or maybe 7 ♦. Six ♠ is enough for me.

[hanp]

I'm with Josh.

[gnasher]

whereagles, on Apr 2 2009, 09:57 AM, said:

Unless you have methods that allow you to probe for 7, WITHOUT MESSING UP, just bid 6♠.

Don't we all have methods that allow that?

1NT 2♥
2♠ 4♣
4♦ 4♥
5♥ 6♣
6♦ 7♠

[benlessard]

I think blasting to 6 is a bit lazy. The risk of missing a cold 7 seems higher than the risk of going down because youve tell the opps that you have a club void.

[jdonn]

awm, on Apr 2 2009, 01:45 PM, said:

I would go with 4♥...exclusion.

While it's certainly nice to know whether partner has three spades, there are a number of sequences where bidding diamonds will make things a lot harder. For example:

1NT-2♥-2♠-3♦-3NT.

Okay, partner (probably) has only two spades. But what is your call now? Presumably 4♠ is to play, 4NT is quantitative, 4-round sounds like patterning out, etc. You can bid 5♣ anyway, but it doesn't seem obvious what suit this is exclusion for. You can blast 6♠ but partner could easily have the goods for a grand or you could be off two cashing aces.

1NT-2♥-2♠-3♦-4♦.

Here partner might even have three spades. But it seems like diamonds have been set as trump. If (like me) you suspect that spades is the better trump suit you may have some issues. Keycard now will be in diamonds, and 4♠ will likely be read as a non-forcing 6-4. I suppose you can bid 5♣ (if this is exclusion for diamonds and not a cue) and then try to sign off in spades (if this will be viewed as to play and not some sort of choice of grands) but the auction seems a lot murkier.

I will bid 6♠ on both auctions, as partner's lack of support is very detrimental to the chances we have a grand slam.

And obviously the odds we are off two cashing aces on any auction are quite small, I mean people are blasting slam on the first round anyway...

Btw I've previously seen people wonder why texas then 5m and jacoby then 5m both seem to be exclusion, or what either should be if it's not exclusion. If you want to bother making sure you have an agreement, perhaps one should be exclusion where partner should treat three card support as the queen, and one exclusion where he shouldn't.

[whereagles]

gnasher, on Apr 2 2009, 09:56 PM, said:

whereagles, on Apr 2 2009, 09:57 AM, said:

Unless you have methods that allow you to probe for 7, WITHOUT MESSING UP, just bid 6♠.

Don't we all have methods that allow that?

1NT 2♥
2♠ 4♣
4♦ 4♥
5♥ 6♣
6♦ 7♠

Maybe. But even discarding ridiculous nonsense such as "4♣ is gerber" there might be an issue: is

1NT 2♥
2♠ 3♠

forcing or not? If it is, then 4♣ as splinter is ok. If not, you might want to assign

1NT 2♥
2♠ 4♣

as slam try in spades, cue.