[AceOfHeart]

Playing sayc
all vul
West North East south
pass pass pass 1S
pass 2H pass 3D
pass 3H pass 4D
pass 4S pass ?


Holding
♠AKQ93
♥
♦AK865
♣KJ3

What is your next bid? Will you bid like the south in the above seq so far?

Holding south

♠5
♥AJ8542
♦3
♣A10964
Will you bid like south in the above seq?

Is there any seq to reach 6C?

[Cascade]

I pass 4♠. Although I will be wondering why partner did not open with six hearts.

No I do not bid like South did here. I would open the bidding with the South hand.

1♥ 1♠
2♣ ...

This start should give you a great chance of getting to 6♣.

... 2♦ fourth suit
3♣ 4♣
etc - cue-bids of choice

I can't imagine stopping short of 6♣ now.

[whereagles]

I would bid 3NT after 3H. I don't think I would reach 6C at table.

[pclayton]

South has a clear opener IMO, leading to a real easy:

1♥-1♠
2♣ - 2♦
3♣- 4♣or whatever you use for minor key card blackwood. This is a better hand for kickback, by the way.

Question to all - does your partnership play 4♥ here as EKCB?


Even if South doesn't open, I like the sequence:

1♠ - 2♥
3♦ - 3♥
4♣

This shows the fragment and allows responder to show secondary diamond support. Although a little awkward, the auction should continue 5♣ - 6♣

[Free]

I would just start with a GF opening... 2♣, you'll find your ♣ fit fast enough imo.

[Fluffy]

Its sad, but opening 9 HCP is forbidden on some sites, so you have to live with that.

What I disagree about is the 4♦ bid, you have combined 30 HCP without a fit, where do you think you are going?, 3NT looks like the best aproach IMO.

after 3NT north may reopen with 4♣?, would it be natural?, I am not sure about it.

[Cascade]

Fluffy, on Jul 25 2004, 07:29 AM, said:

Its sad, but opening 9 HCP is forbidden on some sites, so you have to live with that.

Where is this forbidden?

Whereever they are not playing bridge. Bridge is a game with laws. One of those laws says (in part) :

"The sponsoring organisation may regulate the use of bidding or play conventions. Zonal organisations may, in addition, regulate partnership understandings (even if not conventional) that permit the partnership’s initial actions at the one level to be made with a hand of a King or more below average strength. "

Opening 1♥ here is not conventional.

This hand is not "a King or more below average strength". I would judge that this hand is above average strength!!!.

Therefore noone on the planet (or in cyber-space) has the right to regulate that you cannot open this hand.

[epeeist]

This is a very long reply, because for whatever reason I found the analysis interesting. Some of my partners might wish I put as much thought into my own bidding and play... Given the bidding as shown, I'd pass 4♠, though I _don't_ think the partnership should be in 4♠, nor do I agree with the bidding.

If I were south (I'm assuming the 1st hand was south, not the 2nd which is also labelled as south in your post...), here's what I'd think (someone with a negative opinion of me may stop reading at this point... ). My explanation of my thinking is much longer than my thinking would be . First, I'll discuss initial bidding as given (N passed, S bid 1♠), then if N opened 2♥...

I should note, even if 6♣ makes (there are all sorts of distributions where it wouldn't against good defence...), that doesn't necessarily mean it should be bid by a partnership using sayc. In fact, I think it shouldn't be bid (at least, not using sayc), given that north passed.

First, when partner passed, even though you have a 20HCP (22 points total counting length the way I do...) hand, you know unless partner has good fit with you in ♠ or ♦ slam is highly unlikely (usually 33 points for small slam between 2 hands, I think, 37 for grand, assuming needed stoppers). Although you have a void, you don't have great length (only 5 cards in ♠ and ♦) for either ruffing or NT trick-running purposes. But, it's possible if p has 10+ points and/or excellent fit with your hand. At the same time, you know unless p has a truly terrible hand, game is highly likely.

When partner then responds 2♥ over your 1♠ bid, however, you can be pretty sure that you have a misfit (partner's length is in your void), and given partner's original pass, it seems highly unlikely p has, say, AKQJ♥ on which you could discard all sorts of losers. It seems reasonable, however, to assume p has at least one or two ♥ stoppers and is unlikely to have great length in ♠. P (likely...) also has at least 6 points, since otherwise N should pass (except for preemptive ♠ raise, which N didn't do).

So with 3-5 tricks in ♠, 2-4 in ♦, at least one ♣ stopper (with west on lead, i.e. if south is declarer) and an assumed 1-2 tricks in ♥, and at least 26 HCP, it seems 3NT is very likely to make, while slam in anything is unlikely to make (given N originally passed), so what's wrong with bidding of south: 1♠ - north: 2♥ - south: 3NT? N can correct to 4♠ if he/she has 3 of them, and if not, you're better off in 3NT.

IF N HAD OPENED 2♥ (WEAK 2):

If instead of passing, north had opened 2♥ (weak 2, 6-11 HCP and usually 6-card suit in sayc), the best response by south is, in my opinion, 3NT. In sayc, a game-bid response to a weak two (in 3NT or a suit) is to play; N should not "correct" it. So still end up in 3NT.

If using RONF, S could respond 3♦ if N opened 2♥, to which N would likely rebid 3NT -- which S should pass (N _might_ have length in ♣, or just a ♣ stopper, or just think it's a good risk...). So again, in 3NT but with N as declarer (it should be S, the stronger hand).

Maybe, IF S KNOWS N KNOWS SAYC WELL if N opens 2♥, S could respond 2NT (forcing for 1 round, interested in game, N rebids 3♥ with 5-8 points, shows "feature" like ace or king in another suit with stronger hand). North then responds 3♣ which shows the ace (since south has the king, south knows N has the ace -- with a strong hand lacking a "feature", N would raise to 3NT and let S take further action, or in this case, pass). No matter what N responds, S gets another chance to bid

After north's 3!c, south knows p has A♣ and (should have) good ♥ ("strong" weak 2 hand, since didn't rebid 3♥). Given the points, and the misfit, I'd probably settle (as south) for 3NT, letting partner "correct" to 4♠ if he/she had 3 of them.

HOW TO REACH 6♣:

I can't see how to reach it with the bidding as shown. Also, as noted earlier, I think 6♣ is a "bad" slam, only 8 clubs and missing the queen (plus problems in other suits, they're not very long, trying to ruff all the losers will I think produce problems...assuming 2 ♠ losers and 3 ♦ losers, even subtracting one for the discard you get on the A♥, that only allows for one round of trump to be drawn, etc., difficulties establishing ♥ given only 3 trump, 2 of them honours, in S hand...but this is not an analysis of why the slam is bad...) and should not be bid in sayc. However, I can see two ways it which it _might_ be reached by an aggressive, but still reasonable, partnership.

First, if bidding goes N: pass S: 1♠ N: 2♥ S: 3NT, then N knows S likely doesn't have good ♥ support, but (being vulnerable), has stoppers in all suits (except ♥) and a very strong hand (should be 20+ points and/or highly distributional, since S jumped to NT game with N a passed hand and misfit). So N _might_ decide to show his/her 2nd suit, by bidding ♣. In this sequence, in my opinion, it might be unclear whether 4♣ would be Gerber or not (well, it would be unclear to me, so I assume it would be to my partner also... ). So to avoid weird bidding disaster (I don't know about you, but I've certainly alerted bids to opponents like "I think p bid Gerber, if so this means...") I'd bid, as N, 5♣. Given that N didn't check for aces, and had a passed hand, and has bid beyond 4♥/♠ game, then S has to realize it must mean N has a maximum pass, and likely 6/5 or better in ♥ and ♣. So S can bid 5NT (to play) if lacking ♣ support, 5♥ with a doubleton, pass 5♣ with support but bad ♣, or, in this case, bid 6♣. It's risky, and aggressive, but seems not insane to me...unlike this next emoticon .

Second, if the bidding goes N: 2♥ S: 3NT, then N as above, knows S has at most a singleton ♥, stoppers in all suits, and very strong (20+?) hand, can reason as above, and bid 5♣ etc. raised by S to 6♣ for reasons given above.

This all assumes, of course, that one has a partner who can figure out what your 5♣ bid means. Also, of course, you have to alert your opponents. If I was N, I'd probably alert my 5♣ bid as "slam interest, shows ♣ length/strength, p might not understand" or something like that.

[Cascade]

epeeist, on Jul 25 2004, 09:12 AM, said:

I can't see how to reach it with the bidding as shown. Also, as noted earlier, I think 6♣ is a "bad" slam, only 8 clubs and missing the queen (plus problems in other suits, they're not very long, trying to ruff all the losers will I think produce problems...assuming 2 ♠ losers and 3 ♦ losers, even subtracting one for the discard you get on the A♥, that only allows for one round of trump to be drawn, etc., difficulties establishing ♥ given only 3 trump, 2 of them honours, in S hand...but this is not an analysis of why the slam is bad...) and should not be bid in sayc.

I think this is a reasonable slam.

You have six side suit winners. If they all stand up, reasonably likely, then you need six trump winners for slam. Two heart ruffs in dummy should bring the trump winners up to at least six even if you have to lose to the ♣Q.

I fancy my chances in 6♣.

I did a double dummy analysis. I know this notoriously bad with a two way guess for the Queen. However the double dummy analysis said that you can make 13 tricks more often than you can only make 11 or fewer. In fact it was almost 50-50 between 12 and 13 tricks available with only about 5% of hands where 12 tricks were not available. Even allowing for some of those 12 trick hands only producing 11 tricks in practice I would expect 6♣ to make much more often than not.

[luke warm]

the only slam i see comes about if north opens 1H (i guess it's north, hard to tell)... then 1S/2C/2D/3C/4C rkc

if north doesn't open, i agree with free... as south, open 2C.. but i don't see reaching the slam from there.. the danger is well known, 2C isn't very efficient with a 2 suiter

fwiw i think north has a clear 1H opening on this hand... so would zar (and ben)

[inquiry]

luke warm, on Jul 24 2004, 10:14 PM, said:

fwiw i think north has a clear 1H opening on this hand... so would zar (and ben)

Not only would i opne with 1♥, over 1♠, there is an excellent chance i would jump rebid 3♣ showing a strong hand.

[EricK]

inquiry, on Jul 25 2004, 04:45 AM, said:

luke warm, on Jul 24 2004, 10:14 PM, said:

fwiw i think north has a clear 1H opening on this hand... so would zar (and ben)

Not only would i opne with 1♥, over 1♠, there is an excellent chance i would jump rebid 3♣ showing a strong hand.

A jump bid is going a bit far with this hand, I think.

However, the fact that most who have replied would have opened 1♥ does not detract from the difficulty of the posed question. Supposing the other hand had been dealer, so that the opening bid is going to be 1♠. It is very hard to get to a ♣ contract.

I suppose something like

1♠ 2♥
3♦ 4♣
6♣

is the simplest way. But I am not sure I would venture the 4♣ bid at the table.

Eric

[Fluffy]

Cascade, on Jul 24 2004, 08:31 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Jul 25 2004, 07:29 AM, said:

Its sad, but opening 9 HCP is forbidden on some sites, so you have to live with that.

Where is this forbidden?

Whereever they are not playing bridge. Bridge is a game with laws. One of those laws says (in part) :

"The sponsoring organisation may regulate the use of bidding or play conventions. Zonal organisations may, in addition, regulate partnership understandings (even if not conventional) that permit the partnership’s initial actions at the one level to be made with a hand of a King or more below average strength. "

Opening 1♥ here is not conventional.

This hand is not "a King or more below average strength". I would judge that this hand is above average strength!!!.

Therefore noone on the planet (or in cyber-space) has the right to regulate that you cannot open this hand.

I am not sure ifour NBO does the right to regulate or not, what I know is they do, I haven´t seen in writtenalready but heard it from several directors: a system that allows you to open at level 1 with less than 10 HCP is forbidden. That is applied on all tourneaments except maybe 2 or 3.

[Cascade]

Fluffy, on Jul 25 2004, 10:38 PM, said:

I am not sure ifour NBO does the right to regulate or not, what I know is they do, I haven´t seen in writtenalready but heard it from several directors: a system that allows you to open at level 1 with less than 10 HCP is forbidden. That is applied on all tourneaments except maybe 2 or 3.

Which NBO?

This is nonsense. If they do this then they are regulating that you cannot use modern day expert judgement.

[Free]

Woops, I misread, thought the hand with ♠ and ♦ opened... Zzzz

[mikestar]

The ACBL interprets the law to mean a King or more below average high-card strength--that is 7 or fewer HCP. And it is indded illegal in ACBL-land to open at the one level with 0-7 HCP. 9 HCP is perfectly legal however.

A natural notrump 1NT is restricted--you can open it with 8-9 HCP but if you do so you cannot play any conventions in response. Convention responses may be used freely with 1N openings promising 10+ HCP.

This same restiction is used to control weak two bids. If you want to be able to open 2S with 2-12 HCP or a four card suit, it is perfectly legal--but the ACBL bans all conventional responses and rebids to such a weak two.

[Cascade]

High Card Points are not enshrined in law. Someone saying that 7 hcp is a king or more below average strength does not make it so.

At any rate at least we agree that the 9 hcp hand under discussion is a perfectly legal opening bid at the one level.

I am still interested in which jurisdiction it is not allowed.

I wonder what would happen if a pair played a super weak NT and agreed to play no conventions thereafter. Would they be welcomed?

[mikestar]

Cascade, on Jul 26 2004, 12:03 AM, said:

... I wonder what would happen if a pair played a super weak NT and agreed to play no conventions thereafter. Would they be welcomed?

In the ACBL, an 8 HCP 1NT is perfectly OK even in a Limited Convention Chart game--but the no conventions rule is quite absolute and includes conventional defenses to opponents natural and conventional intervention. For example, 1N-(2S)-X must be a penalty double--a takeout double being conventional is disallowed! It is highly doubtful that this is the best treatment after a NT this weak, but it is the only legal treatment of the double.

[Cascade]

Yes I understand but I am interested does anyone actually take this option and play without conventions. And if they do what sort of reception do they get from the other players and directors.

I imagine that you could be quite creative without making a bid conventional.

[sceptic]

COME ALIVE with six five, I would go down in 7spades, then post it here and ask where I went wrong again