[Wackojack]

Scoring: IMP

1nt-2♥
2♠- 3♣
3NT- 4♠

---

This hand came up on BBO yesterday. We were playing Texas, normal transfers and 3M 3154 as per BBO Adv. I held the opening 1NT hand. We had no agreement on what 3♦ would mean after 3♣ but normally I would like it to mean agreeing spades and a control. Why didnt we bid the slam?

[jillybean]

3♣ is cue ? I play this as 2suiter, ♥'s/♣'s slammish.
Sounds like you need to agree on follow ups, 3♦ would be nice or even 3♠ letting partner show ♥ control.

[Winstonm]

This is one of those hands that drives the careful bidder crazy when playing a supposed weaker team.

The careful bidder will probably bid: 1N-2H, 2S-4S as a mild slam try and that will be it.

The more exuberant opponents will bid:
1N-2H
2S-4N! (Blackwood )
5-yadi ya - 6S.

You lose 10, the match, and another little slice of your decorum.

[Jlall]

Seems like east can just bid keycard

[ONEferBRID]

Responder's rebid:
--I think the "standard" structure is that 3C/3D/3H after the transfer is GF and shows a "2nd 5cd(usually) suit".
--4C/4D/4H are "self-splinters" w/6+Sp.
--4NT = Quantitative
--Texas, followed by 4NT is RKC.
--1NT - 2H!
   2S - 4S = mild slam try w/6+Sp (as per Windstonm)

Opener would have to make a move over 4S and I'm not sure he would.
Then again he has 5 controls, and with that A x in trumps he should
make a 5C cue:

1NT - 2H!
2S - 4S
5C - 5H
6S

[cherdanno]

3♣ is a second suit, not a cuebid.
You need to discuss how to make a slam invite with a 6322 hand with a major (1N 2H 2S 4S in US standard).
You need to realize when you have a slam force opposite the appropriate number of keycards (East can bid 1N 4H 4S 4N=rkcb in US standard).

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 02:28 PM, said:

Seems like east can just bid keycard

Taking a second look, this seems completely accurate. I can't seem to invent a 15-point hand that isn't virtually foolproof at 5S if I have to sign off.

[uday]

I could come up with hands where the 5 level is uncomfortable but it took a little work. Perhaps treating this hand as 'enough to force to slam' is the most practical approach, as JL says.

[andy_h]

East is too conservative. 15 count with a self suiter and rich in controls opposite a 1NT opener.

[Winstonm]

uday, on Aug 29 2009, 02:38 PM, said:

I could come up with hands where the 5 level is uncomfortable but it took a little work. Perhaps treating this hand as 'enough to force to slam' is the most practical approach, as JL says.

Yes. If you have to work that hard just to visualize a hand that might have trouble at the 5-level, the pragmatic thing to do is just to Texas and use RKCB, just as JL said.

[Phil]

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 02:28 PM, said:

Seems like east can just bid keycard

Or at least Texas and cue.

By the way, if you are going the Texas...RKC route, why not just Gerber (barf) it?

[Winstonm]

Phil, on Aug 29 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 02:28 PM, said:

Seems like east can just bid keycard

Or at least Texas and cue.

By the way, if you are going the Texas...RKC route, why not just Gerber (barf) it?

Have to transfer because of the xx in diamonds. Most would play transfer then jump to 4C as a splinter.

[Phil]

Winstonm, on Aug 29 2009, 03:15 PM, said:

Phil, on Aug 29 2009, 03:06 PM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 02:28 PM, said:

Seems like east can just bid keycard

Or at least Texas and cue.

By the way, if you are going the Texas...RKC route, why not just Gerber (barf) it?

Have to transfer because of the xx in diamonds. Most would play transfer then jump to 4C as a splinter.

I'm talking directly over 1N. Trump support doesn't seem to be an issue for anyone.

I suppose right siding it might with my xx... (Is that what you meant?)

[Jlall]

Phil, on Aug 29 2009, 03:19 PM, said:

I suppose right siding it might with my xx... (Is that what you meant?)

DING DING DING (that is what he meant).

[Jlall]

BTW this seems like an excellent hand to play the meckwell convention that 2H then 5C+ are answering keycards for spades. So 1N 2H 2S 5S, 2+Q. If your hand takes control it seems impossible to bid 7 when it is correct (partner won't know about your specific kings, you won't know about his source of tricks that lack the king) unless you play 1N 4H 4S 4N 5H 6C shows the CK (also a meckwell treatment lol).

[gnasher]

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 09:31 PM, said:

BTW this seems like an excellent hand to play the meckwell convention that 2H then 5C+ are answering keycards for spades.

I like that.

Isn't it about time Meckwell retired from serious bridge? Not that I think they're past it, but I want them to start writing books about all this stuff.

[neilkaz]

gnasher, on Aug 29 2009, 04:16 PM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 09:31 PM, said:

BTW this seems like an excellent hand to play the meckwell convention that 2H then 5C+ are answering keycards for spades.

I like that.

Isn't it about time Meckwell retired from serious bridge? Not that I think they're past it, but I want them to start writing books about all this stuff.

I like it too !! But Meckwell can keep playing since we have Justin to tell us their gadgets.

[Winstonm]

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 03:26 PM, said:

Phil, on Aug 29 2009, 03:19 PM, said:

I suppose right siding it might with my xx... (Is that what you meant?)

DING DING DING (that is what he meant).

LoL. Maybe right-siding the contract is too old-fashioned?

[Cascade]

gnasher, on Aug 30 2009, 09:16 AM, said:

Jlall, on Aug 29 2009, 09:31 PM, said:

BTW this seems like an excellent hand to play the meckwell convention that 2H then 5C+ are answering keycards for spades.

I like that.

Me too.

[Fluffy]

I disagree with most and think west has a bid part of the blame.

Partner showed clubs with 3 clubs, and you failed to raise him because you though 3♦ was something conventional that you can show with 3♠ instead.

Next he showed a slam interest hand with 6 spades, and you have ♠Ax, ♣AQ9x in his suits!. Passing was very bad judgement IMO.