[jdaming]

Scoring: IMP

---

N dealer all vul. If you get to slam how?

We had an interesting result

[jdonn]

I wouldn't get to slam. 1♠ 1NT 3♠ 4♠. Both players are just barely shy of more aggressive action, north from rebidding 3♦ and south from rebidding 4♣.

[kenrexford]

Damn close, but I do agree that it requires an overbid by someone. It is just too hard for anyone to move.

The problem is that Opener does not find out the good news in time. When 3♠ is raised to 4♠, he suspects that slam might make but cannot explore it. Had he been able to demand trumps and game by bidding 4♣ as a self splinter, Responder would accept, but Opener does not yet know of the fit.

Responder might visualize the possibility, but what can he do about it? A muddled pick and sniff might happen, but no one will really know what needs to be known.

[mtvesuvius]

1♠ - 1NT - 3♠ - 4♠. I won't be there, but it's close.

[jdaming]

So we were all on skype playing a friendly game and N/E were beginners. He asked a question as to how to bid this which...swayed my judgement to bid 4♣ here which afterwards I agree is a touch pushy. In this case I was slightly biased so we after the 4♣ we bid fairly easily to 6♠ and then I got a Qxxx/K♠ break. FML. I guess it serves me right for being over-agressive with UI.

[barryallen]

jdaming, on Apr 21 2009, 02:30 PM, said:

So we were all on skype playing a friendly game and N/E were beginners. He asked a question as to how to bid this which...swayed my judgement to bid 4♣ here which afterwards I agree is a touch pushy. In this case I was slightly biased so we after the 4♣ we bid fairly easily to 6♠ and then I got a Qxxx/K♠ break. FML. I guess it serves me right for being over-agressive with UI.

Once you get there it must be about 2:1 in favour, but you must have used too much up in getting there. The more I see of these "marginal" bidding slams makes precision or similar systems very attractive from that perspective.

[kenrexford]

barryallen, on Apr 22 2009, 01:40 PM, said:

The more I see of these "marginal" bidding slams makes precision or similar systems very attractive from that perspective.

The one thing I don't get about this general sentiment:

People often comment that strong club systems are great for getting to slam because of all the information exchange that is useful for slam purposes.

However, when you point out how 2/1 can be much more effective if developed into a complicated and elaborate approach, on par with Precision auctions, a frequent complaint if that these complicated and elaborate approaches reveal too much information to the opponents.

I'm not sure if these comments are coming from totally different groups of people, but it seems somewhat contradictory.

[barryallen]

kenrexford, on Apr 22 2009, 03:03 PM, said:

barryallen, on Apr 22 2009, 01:40 PM, said:

The more I see of these "marginal" bidding slams makes precision or similar systems very attractive from that perspective.

The one thing I don't get about this general sentiment:

People often comment that strong club systems are great for getting to slam because of all the information exchange that is useful for slam purposes.

However, when you point out how 2/1 can be much more effective if developed into a complicated and elaborate approach, on par with Precision auctions, a frequent complaint if that these complicated and elaborate approaches reveal too much information to the opponents.

I'm not sure if these comments are coming from totally different groups of people, but it seems somewhat contradictory.

Just an observation, not a recommendation. These sort of hands, where most of the time you are at least a level higher in 2/1 before you get to the business end just seem perfect for the theoretical precision approach. Not advocating precision as there are pluses and minuses with any system, especially with interference.

[kenrexford]

barryallen, on Apr 22 2009, 03:51 PM, said:

Just an observation, not a recommendation. These sort of hands, where most of the time you are at least a level higher in 2/1 before you get to the business end just seem perfect for the theoretical precision approach. Not advocating precision as there are pluses and minuses with any system, especially with interference.

I didn't mean to sound like I was attacking. But, I think a lot of people miss out on what 2/1 is capable of.

Take this situation as an example. A plausible high-tech auction:

1♠-P-1NT(forcing)-P
2♣(artificial, one-round force)-P-2NT(balanced 10-11 count)-P-
3♣(self-splinter, spades set as trumps)-P-3♦(cue of a diamond control)-P-
3♥(cue of a heart control)-P-4♣(club Ace, poor trumps)-P-
4♦(cue of a diamond control, poor trumps not a problem)-P-4♥(LTTC)-P-

Opener now knows that Responder has the club Ace, the diamond Ace, and another interesting card (obviously the heart Queen or the club King). He can see the hand play out as making six when spades cooperate.

It's just a matter of how much junk you want with 2/1 GF.

[Flameous]

Agree there with Ken. Gazilli sort of approach makes this rather easy to bid, giving the same advantages strong club has keeping the bidding low.

This gets more interesting though if we change the !S 9 and J. Then I think it's really hard to bid the slam so that it's known to be good.

[awm]

The thing is that this is just a so-so slam because of the spade suit. I can construct some auctions that reasonably lead to keycard, but I'm not convinced north will go in an eight-card fit missing two trump honors. Note that south's spade nine is a big card here too -- replace it with the two and you can't really pick up any 4-1 break.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

If the auction starts with

1S - 1NT
3S -

I think South can and maybe should make a move over
3S with 4C, but I am not sure that will get North exited
given his club shortness.

As it is you have a perfect fit without any wastage, and
I would not worry to much about missing this one.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

Definitely no slam for me. I'll be lucky to get to game... lol

1♠ 1NT
2♦ 2♠
3♠ 4♠

[miguelm]

whereagles, on Apr 23 2009, 03:13 AM, said:

Definitely no slam for me. I'll be lucky to get to game... lol

1♠ 1NT
2♦ 2♠
3♠ 4♠

brrrr....

Two things about that auction....

2D. Okay, I understand you might not want to jump on this suit but the rest of the hand is so good.... not one single wasted value, and even the spade suit is not THAT lousy (actually, I have seen much worse lol).

2S. This last one is a huge underbid IMO. Which hands do you bid 2NT with...?

[Free]

Flameous, on Apr 22 2009, 11:24 PM, said:

Gazilli sort of approach makes this rather easy to bid

Actually it's not as easy as you might think:
1♠ - 1NT
2♣! - 2♦!
2♥ - 2NT/3♣
3♠ - ?

If you can cuebid 4♣ you might get to slam, but opener still only knows about 8+HCP, so South can still have just 2 Aces. It depends on agreements if you should cuebid with 8HCP or not.

[petergreat]

Game, yes.
Slam too dangerous.

I think it serves you right for bidding slam...

[whereagles]

miguelm, on Apr 23 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

whereagles, on Apr 23 2009, 03:13 AM, said:

Definitely no slam for me. I'll be lucky to get to game... lol

1♠ 1NT
2♦ 2♠
3♠ 4♠

brrrr....

Two things about that auction....

2D. Okay, I understand you might not want to jump on this suit but the rest of the hand is so good.... not one single wasted value, and even the spade suit is not THAT lousy (actually, I have seen much worse lol).

2S. This last one is a huge underbid IMO. Which hands do you bid 2NT with...?

2♦: no wasted values? How do you know that? Responder didn't snow any suit. For all you know, he could have x Qxx xxx KJTxxx.

Anyway, the auction I gave is just an example. One can also bid, say

1♠ 1NT
3♠ 4♠

1♠ 1NT
2♦ 2NT
3♠ 4♠

I have no particular preference for any of these sequences.

[barryallen]

awm, on Apr 22 2009, 05:35 PM, said:

The thing is that this is just a so-so slam because of the spade suit. I can construct some auctions that reasonably lead to keycard, but I'm not convinced north will go in an eight-card fit missing two trump honors. Note that south's spade nine is a big card here too -- replace it with the two and you can't really pick up any 4-1 break.

Is it that bad? Even without the ♠9 your chances must be in the high 50's%? Then factor in the possibility that dummy can possibly hold the ♠9 along with the possibility that you can pick up some of those 4:1 fits with a reduction play? I would imagine your odds to be in the low 60's?

[kenrexford]

barryallen, on Apr 23 2009, 09:47 AM, said:

awm, on Apr 22 2009, 05:35 PM, said:

The thing is that this is just a so-so slam because of the spade suit. I can construct some auctions that reasonably lead to keycard, but I'm not convinced north will go in an eight-card fit missing two trump honors. Note that south's spade nine is a big card here too -- replace it with the two and you can't really pick up any 4-1 break.

Is it that bad? Even without the ♠9 your chances must be in the high 50's%? Then factor in the possibility that dummy can possibly hold the ♠9 along with the possibility that you can pick up some of those 4:1 fits with a reduction play? I would imagine your odds to be in the low 60's?

Opener has AJ10654. Responder has two spades of unknown value. If the spade is not an honor, then the odds seems to favor some card of value.

If trumps split 4-1 with a stiff honor, the 9 gains a lot, because 9-x-x-H allows a later finesse, finding the bad news, and maybe a trump reduction followed by a final trick en passant.

If trumps split 4-1 with HHxx in front, this is interesting. x-x-10-x, then x-Q-A-x, leaves Declarer running into the en passant and reduction line, unless his 6 grows up. If dummy holds 98, 97, or 87, and the stiff to Declarer's left is the missing 7, 8, or 9, then the HHxx can be picked up.

[kgr]

1♠-2♣
3♠-3NT
 
2♣=♣'s and 10+ or 3card ♠ and limit+
3♠=15+ and 6 card ♠