[Cyberyeti]

1:

Scoring: IMP

2♣-2♦
2N(23-24 bal)-3♦(♥)
3♥-3♠
4♠-?

---

2♦ is ostensibly negative, but we tend to hate the 2N response and won't bid a 5 card heart suit as bad as this.

Do you go on ?

2:

Scoring: IMP

2♣-2♦
2N(23-24 bal)-3♦(♥)
3♥-3♠
4♠-?

---

How do you think the auction should proceed opposite AQJx, Axx, A, AKQxx ?

3:

Scoring: IMP

2♣-2♦
2N(23-24 bal)-3♦(♥)
3♥-3♠
4♠-?

---

This hand by our methods requires a little thinking outside the box as we play 1N-3any as forcing and one suited, and stayman followed by 3minor as to play, so while we can get the hand across, it would take some imagination to do.

Our auction should have been:

1N-2♣(stayman)
2♥-2♠(minor suit stayman, at least marginal slam invite, may or may not have spades)
3♣-3♦(must show 5 as partner 4-4 in ♥/♣, and by inference 4♠ from the stayman)
4♦ and onward to a slam

[effervesce]

1. No, if partner had a magical hand with all the necessary controls for slam they would have cuebid instead of 4♠; eg AKxx Ax AKxx Axx is far too good to simply bid 4♠ over 3♠ - 4♣ cuebid is better.

2. I give a positive 3♦. Bidding 2♦ then 4♦ presumably shows fewer HCP.
Over partner's hearts bid I raise, over anything else I repeat diamonds.

3. A tough hand to bid without a gadget to show the heart singleton or transfer to minor, bid spades - your given sequence makes it hard for the 1NT opener to evaluate how the hands fit.

[Cyberyeti]

The point in 1 is that if partner has AKxx, AKJ, Axx, Axx for example the slam is excellent, AKxx, Axx, AKx, AJx it's close to no play, so you're sort of shooting in the dark.

I'm beginning to think that 5♥ is the right bid to continue with to focus partner's mind in the right place. That you've made a try implies you have a positive, that you didn't bid 2♥ first time suggests 5 bad hearts and that being the problem with the hand.

Partner possibly should cue on the hand you gave, but remember he's expecting you to have a 4 count not an 8 count so may have just got lazy.

[woefuwabit]

1. The trouble is playing 2♦ as a negative. I far prefer to play it as a waiting bid, allowing opener to show what he opened 2♣ on if the responder is balanced or has nothing that he needs to show immediately. In this sequence I would happily pass 4♠, opener seems to imply with his direct 4♠ bid that he thinks hearts could be a problem

2. 3♦ an easy bid in this case. 8 working hcp and a 6+ suit missing 1 of the 3 top honours. You don't want to bid 2♦ and hear opener rebid 3♣... (playing cheaper minor second negative)

3. How this hand should be bid depends mostly on your 1NT methods, and we don't know your method as well as you do so it would be hard for us to tell you how best to use your method to find the slam. If you think your method is not effective enough, a discussion of a finding a new method should probably start a new thread.

[Cyberyeti]

In 3, I was looking for how other people would bid this hand. I'm trying to see if other methods agree the suit and get the distribution across better than mine do. For the record the other hand is xx, AKQx, 109x, KQxx so 6♦ is cold, but Kx, Axxx, J109, KQxx is a pretty good grand.

The question arising from 2 is are you better placed after 2♣-2♦-3♣-4♦ or 2♣-3♦-4♣-4♦ ? I think the former where you know the diamonds are solid.

In 1, I agree with your assessment if 2♦ is a waiting bid, we do this informally on some hands like this, but I think it's stretching credibility to expect partner to cue with any 4333 here. I think he bids 4♠ and I make a move if I had a positive, he's limited his hand and only cues if he's unexpectedly good which will not be a 4333. It also helps that 4♠ sets the suit. From the style of transfer breaks we play, he won't have 4 hearts, or 3 decent hearts and a good 5 card suit. If he does cue, does he have 4 spades or is he 2344.

[pooltuna]

1.) I would pass

2.) since you have the 4♦ option
2♣ 2♦
2NT 4♦
7♦

3.) If you have tools but you don't use them you are wasting brain cells.

[ONEferBRID]

I don't understand the utility of the suggested 4♦ agreement for the 2nd problem.

Quote

2:
Dealer:  North 
Vul:  N/S 
Scoring:  IMP 
♠  x 
♥  Qxx 
♦  KQJ10xxx 
♣  xx 
Partner opens 2♣

Do you give a 3♦ positive or bid 2♦ intending to follow up with 4♦ showing a solid suit missing the ace.

For me 2C - 2D =waiting and DENIES a 5+cd suit w/at least 2 of top 3 honors.
whereas a direct 3♦ would be positive and show a good suit.

So, for me with a different hand than this one, after:
2C - 2D
2H/2S/3C - 4♦!jump = splinter ; whereas a 3♦ bid would show a 5+ cd suit without 2 of the top 3.

[pooltuna]

ONEferBRID, on Oct 4 2009, 09:13 AM, said:

I don't understand the utility of the suggested 4♦ agreement for the 2nd problem.

Quote

2:
Dealer:  North 
Vul:  N/S 
Scoring:  IMP 
♠  x 
♥  Qxx 
♦  KQJ10xxx 
♣  xx 
Partner opens 2♣

Do you give a 3♦ positive or bid 2♦ intending to follow up with 4♦ showing a solid suit missing the ace.

For me 2C - 2D =waiting and DENIES a 5+cd suit w/at least 2 of top 3 honors.
whereas a direct 3♦ would be positive and show a good suit.

So, for me with a different hand than this one, after:
2C - 2D
2H/2S/3C - 4♦!jump = splinter ; whereas a 3♦ bid would show a 5+ cd suit without 2 of the top 3.

you mean we are allowed to quibble over the OP's given bidding system rather than point out how failing to use your available tools is a waste of brain cells

[ONEferBRID]

If I ever see the auction, 2♣ - 3♦ - 4♣ .... I'm switching to some "Big Club" system.

[straube]

deleted

[straube]

1. 5C. If partner bids 5D, then retreat to 5S. Hopefully partner will get the
message that I don't have a heart control and I'm not particularly worried about trump.

2. 3D. What if partner doesn't cooperate with a 2N rebid? Maybe I wouldn't be able to show a suit this solid.

3. My system would go 1N-2C, 2H-3C(forcing 3D), 3D-3H showing 4-1-5-3. If partner rebids 3N, I'll probably be conservative and just invite slam.

[Cyberyeti]

I will add, that the description of the 2♦ followed by 4♦ in 2 is what old fashioned acol says the bids mean where a positive requires an ace and a king.

This hand was actually held by my opponents so I didn't have this problem. At the table the auction started 2♣-3♦-4♣-4♦ and they only bid 6. Team mates bid 7 but I don't know their auction.

[ONEferBRID]

Hand 2.

Responder is the only one of the partnership that knows of at least 6 tricks ( if not 7 ) in Diam.

Remember the recent thread concerning an opening 4NT -- one of the 2 cases for Pinpoint Blackwood. The other case is an immediate 4NT by Responder after Partner opens:

2♣ - 4NT!
6♠! ( 4 Aces ... this got an LOL from The Hog ) - 7♦

A Q J x
A x x
A
A K Q x x

x
Q x x
K Q J T x x x
x x
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Review:
5C = no aces

5D = D-A or 3 aces without the D-A

5H = H-A or 3 aces without the H-A

5S = S-A or 3 aces without the S-A

5N = C-A or 3 aces without the C-A

The next 3 bids show 2 aces using the CRaSh mnemonic for Color, Rank, and Shape

6C = 2 aces, same color, either red or black (D+H or C+S)

6D = 2 aces, same rank, either minor or major (C+D or H+S)

6H = 2 aces, same shape, either pointy or rounded (D+S or C+H)

6S = all 4 aces

[ONEferBRID]

Cyberyeti, on Oct 4 2009, 02:56 PM, said:

( Hand 2 )
This hand was actually held by my opponents so I didn't have this problem. At the table the auction started 2♣-3♦-4♣-4♦ and they only bid 6. Team mates bid 7 but I don't know their auction.

They had no imagination when they just assumed Opener had 3 Aces in order to bid just 6♦.

If Responder had just invoked 4NT over 4♣ ( RKC for Cl -- "when no suit agreed, 4NT is RKC for the 2C opener's suit ).
The reply would have been 5S = 2 or 5 + ♣Q .

For 5 key cards + Q, Responder can then count a "sure" 12 tricks and an almost certain chance to set up another Club ... if partner has 6+ or even the Jack;
so he bids 7♦ .

[straube]

I think 2C-3D, 4C is a bad bid. Why introduce AKQxx when partner has shown something like KQJxxx or better and you're looking at the ace? I think I like
2C-3D, 4D-4H(RKC), 4N (1 or 4), 5H(courtesy king ask establishing possession of the DQ)-6C, 6D-7D.

If responder had taken control directly (2C-4N) he might have bought a hand with four aces but without the club suit source of tricks.

[Cyberyeti]

straube, on Oct 4 2009, 08:17 PM, said:

I think 2C-3D, 4C is a bad bid.  Why introduce AKQxx when partner has shown something like KQJxxx or better and you're looking at the ace?  I think I like
2C-3D, 4D-4H(RKC), 4N (1 or 4), 5H(courtesy king ask establishing possession of the DQ)-6C, 6D-7D. 

If responder had taken control directly (2C-4N) he might have bought a hand with four aces but without the club suit source of tricks.

Playing normal acol, 2♣-2♦ would be negative so 3♦ shows no more than KJxxx in a 5431 8 count initially as a standard positive, same as 2♥/♠ would.

What happened at the table was that the big hand took control, but was worried about xx, QJ, KQJ10xx, xxx at which point the grand has no play.

[straube]

Cyberyeti, on Oct 5 2009, 03:15 AM, said:

straube, on Oct 4 2009, 08:17 PM, said:

I think 2C-3D, 4C is a bad bid.  Why introduce AKQxx when partner has shown something like KQJxxx or better and you're looking at the ace?  I think I like
2C-3D, 4D-4H(RKC), 4N (1 or 4), 5H(courtesy king ask establishing possession of the DQ)-6C, 6D-7D. 

If responder had taken control directly (2C-4N) he might have bought a hand with four aces but without the club suit source of tricks.

Playing normal acol, 2♣-2♦ would be negative so 3♦ shows no more than KJxxx in a 5431 8 count initially as a standard positive, same as 2♥/♠ would.

What happened at the table was that the big hand took control, but was worried about xx, QJ, KQJ10xx, xxx at which point the grand has no play.

Playing normal acol, 2♣-2♦ would be negative so 3♦ shows no more than KJxxx in a 5431 8 count initially as a standard positive, same as 2♥/♠ would.

I think it's very wrong to promise only KJxxx with a bid as preemptive as 2C-3D.

If you're trying to get across points, maybe you should play 2D as a positive and 2H as a negative (2N would show hearts). Showing a suit (before opener's rebid) should primarily promise a good suit and secondarily show values.

[Cyberyeti]

it can be worse if you don't.

Certainly in this neck of the woods, a number of pairs play herbert 2nd negs after 2♣, so 2♣-2♦-3♣-3♦ is negative and you have to bid 3N to bid diamonds after the negative, thereby wrongsiding a NT contract and not telling partner you have 8+.

Preferred method,

2♦ = 2nd neg or balanced pos
2♥ = semi pos 5-8

[Zelandakh]

With a previous partner we played a somewhat different structure over 2♣ which you might find avoids the 2NT response problem you mentioned:-

2♦ is any positive
2♥ is a double negative
2♠ is a (semi-)balanced semi-positive
2NT thru 3♥ are semi-positive transfers to the suit above

Not entirely relevant to the question thugh so some alternative ideas to those already posted...

1)
2♣ - 2♦ (positive)
2NT - 3♣ (puppet)
3♦ - 4♣ (slam try, both majors)

Now 4♠ would turn down the slam try, while 5♣ would be RKCB for spades. This sequence allows you to make a slam try below game level. With 4♠5♥ hands over 2NT, I go the transfer route only on hands that know whether they want to make a move over 4M.


2) Playing 2♦ as positive here solves the problem
2♣ - 2♦ (positive)
3♣ - 4♦ (or even 5♦ if that will be understood as a picture bid!)
etc


3) Playing regular Stayman your auction looks the same as mine; if puppet, assuming opener is 2=4=3=4 max, it goes something like this:-
1NT - 2♣ (puppet)
2♦ - 2♥ (asks if 4 spades, denies 4 hearts)
3♣ - 3♦ (4+ diamonds, SI)
3NT - 4♣ (3 clubs, and yes this commits you to 4♠ opposite 3=4=2=4)
4♦ - 4♥ (RKCB)
etc

[gnasher]

On 2, what you say about "normal" Acol sounds to me like very old-fashioned Acol.

Nowadays most good pairs play 2C-2D;2M-4D as a splinter, on grounds of frequency. In fact, this is the first time I have ever heard of someone holding a hand suitable for the traditional Acol meaning for this sequence. Are you sure you didn't get it out of a book?

Similarly, it's unfashionable to give a positive in a minor on KJxxx. The reasons are obvious - it eats an entire level of the bidding, for the dubious benefit of showing a suit that we probably don't want to play in. If you're concerned about getting across your values, it's equally effective to bid 2♦ now and waste a level of bidding on a later round.