[kenrexford]

♠AKQxxx ♥Ax ♦A ♣Q109x

You open 2♣. Debatable, but you do.

Partner is a passed hand, but he comes alive with a 3♣ response. (Normal approach, 2♥ would have been an immediate double negative, 2♦ artificial GF, all else "standard.")

Suppose, for the sake of the question, that you had one call to make before drinks. What call would you make, and is there any possibility that your decision would result in a set? Add one more fact -- the club will NOT have anyone in a grand, but you know that everyone will be in some small slam, whether 6♣, 6♠, or 6NT. I suppose one additional fact -- whatever the form of scoring, you want to get the best reasonable result possible, with one bid.

[ArtK78]

Very odd set of assumptions.

Under these conditions, I would bid 6♣. Either 6♠ or 6NT could be right, but 6♣ requires less from partner (who has already promised a significant club suit) to be right.

I presume that this is a matchpoint event, otherwise 6♣ is 100% clear.

Yes, it is possible that 6♣ could fail. Partner could have:

xxx xx K KJTxxxx

This assumes that 3♣ is a permissible bid with this hand in response to a 2♣ opening (no requirement that the suit be headed by 2 of the top 3 honors, or something like that). A heart lead is going to beat 6♣.

[Trinidad]

I would go for 7♣. Partner is a passed hand, he cannot have a decent 7 card club suit. This means that we can assume he has 5, maybe 6 nice clubs. To me, it seems entirely reasonable to expect ♣AKxxx (since we have QT ourselves). With ♣KJxxx, partner shouldn't take away so much bidding space with a 3♣ bid.

If partner has ♣AKxxx, I expect to make 7♣ by setting up the spade suit and discarding partner's hearts. I know that there are layouts where 7♣ may not make, but you gave me only one bid.

Rik

[kenrexford]

I thought standard was that a positive response promises two of the top three honors and that, if there is an exception, that exception could be ruled out after no 3♣ opening.

[Phil]

kenrexford, on May 15 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

I thought standard was that a positive response promises two of the top three honors and that, if there is an exception, that exception could be ruled out after no 3♣ opening.

If the positive response promised the ♣AK, and the field isn't bidding a grand, why would we do anything but 7♣?

[kenrexford]

Phil, on May 15 2009, 01:04 PM, said:

kenrexford, on May 15 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

I thought standard was that a positive response promises two of the top three honors and that, if there is an exception, that exception could be ruled out after no 3♣ opening.

If the positive response promised the ♣AK, and the field isn't bidding a grand, why would we do anything but but 7♣?

Well, maybe 3♣ doesn't actually promise two of the top three honors. I'm trying to find out what standard is. Of course, I apparently saw some need to ask a simple question in as confusing a manner as possible. Sometimes I even wonder about myself...

[skjaeran]

The way I respond, this is easy. I'll just bid 7♣. Holding QT9 of clubs, partner is bound to have AKxxxx or better. If I didn't have to make just one bid, I'd look for spade support to be able to bid 7NT instead.

[rbforster]

7♣ since 3♣ shows AKxxx (2/3 top) for me. Take my chances we can set up enough tricks between my spades and diamond ruffs in the (my) short hand.

[IdiotVig]

If we're really worried about the club honors, 5NT has to be GSF here, right?

[hanp]

How would you look for spade support Harald?

[RichMor]

I know it's not one bid but 5NT as GSF seems like the way to go.

If pard replies 7♣, bid 7NT for all the matchpoints. If pard replies 6♣, then Pass or 6♠ if you think the field will be there.

If only one bid allowed then 6♠.

[skjaeran]

hanp, on May 15 2009, 08:03 PM, said:

How would you look for spade support Harald?

A very simple concept, Han. I'd bid them.

[IdiotVig]

Quote

If only one bid allowed then 6♠.

Maybe that's the trick here; you "bid" 5NT, and pass partner's response. One bid, one call.

I'm guessing this probably wasn't some semantic trick from Ken in the first place, but one never knows.

[Mbodell]

kenrexford, on May 15 2009, 10:11 AM, said:

Phil, on May 15 2009, 01:04 PM, said:

kenrexford, on May 15 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

I thought standard was that a positive response promises two of the top three honors and that, if there is an exception, that exception could be ruled out after no 3♣ opening.

If the positive response promised the ♣AK, and the field isn't bidding a grand, why would we do anything but but 7♣?

Well, maybe 3♣ doesn't actually promise two of the top three honors. I'm trying to find out what standard is. Of course, I apparently saw some need to ask a simple question in as confusing a manner as possible. Sometimes I even wonder about myself...

I'm pretty sure standard is 2 of the top 3. But I often play it as 1 of the top 2 with partnerships where we open 2♣ on unbalanced 4 LTC or better hands that most BBF people would not open 2♣.

As for the question at hand, at MP if I needed a swing I'd try 6nt and otherwise I'd bid 6♣. At IMPs if I need a swing I'll bid 7♣ and otherwise I'd bid 6♣.

[kenrexford]

IdiotVig, on May 15 2009, 01:55 PM, said:

If we're really worried about the club honors, 5NT has to be GSF here, right?

If partner has shown two of the top three honors, then GSF does ask if he has two of the top three honors. He already told you that.

It might ask if his two honors are the Ace and King, or it might ask if he has all three honors, or if he has Ace King and extra length, or the Jack (maybe Opener has stiff Queen???), but it doesn't ask for what he already showed.

[kenrexford]

BTW -- the reason for the question asked in a strange manner is that I had no tools with this partner. 4NT would have been Roman Blackwood, for some bizarre reason (his idea).

[hanp]

skaeran, on May 15 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

hanp, on May 15 2009, 08:03 PM, said:

How would you look for spade support Harald?

A very simple concept, Han. I'd bid them.

Got the auction wrong. Not easy for such a short auction.

[Winstonm]

Quote

Well, maybe 3♣ doesn't actually promise two of the top three honors. I'm trying to find out what standard is

5NT - I don't care what standard is. I want to know what PARTNER thinks standard is.

[blackshoe]

Winstonm, on May 15 2009, 11:55 PM, said:

5NT - I don't care what standard is. I want to know what PARTNER thinks standard is.

[kenrexford]

Winstonm, on May 15 2009, 11:55 PM, said:

Quote

Well, maybe 3♣ doesn't actually promise two of the top three honors. I'm trying to find out what standard is

5NT - I don't care what standard is. I want to know what PARTNER thinks standard is.

That's the best answer yet. Except, unless partner doesn't know what 5NT means.