[inquiry]

I had an odd idea, perhaps it will be useful, perhaps not.

I have seen so many crazy auctions -- that I thought maybe if we show auctions that just don't make any sense and point out what is wrong with them, it might be useful for beginners. For what I have in mind, no need to show hands. I am just talking about auctions that are "wrong" on the surface.

For example.....

Opener Responder
2NT       3NT
6NT

I have run across this auction a lot lately, sometimes as 2C-2D-2NT-3NT-6NT

More recently, I found this one...

Opener Responder
2♣       2NT *(8-11 hcp)
3♥       4NT
5♣       6NT

What is wrong with these auctions you ask?

In the first examples, 2NT was not forcing, and limited by the ability to do something else. Responder signs off in 3NT with no attempt to invite slam, and opener just jumps to slam. The problem here is opener is a beginner (almost in every case) and has a GOOD hand. So good, he finds it hard to pass once his partner supports him. But, he already told his story with the 2NT bid. He has to accept his partners decision and simply pass.

The last hand, responder was much better than a beginner (in theory). With his lack of a heart fit and 10 hcp, I have no idea why he forced to slam. Perhaps he meant 4NT to show he was max for his bid and 5♣ response he figured what the heck and bid slam. But after limiting your hand, yes, opening 2NT limits your hand, just to a whole bunch of points), you need to let partner decide. Take the last example. East could bid 3NT and if partenr was interested in possible slam, he could raise to 4NT to invite if Responder is on maximum range.

As you run across similar auctions, post them in this thread.

[Cyberyeti]

This reminds me of the auction 1N-2N-6N pre bidding boxes.

The 1N is barely an opening bid, and when his partner bids 2N, opener forgets he opened it, so raises his partner's 2N opener to 6.

[Mbodell]

I've seen the 1n-2n-6n before for sure even with bidding boxes, for that very reason (6n bidder says "I forgot I opened").

I've also seen 1n-2n-3n-6n where the 2n bidder was inviting slam and when partner showed a maximum 1n they could bid 6n. Obviously, here they didn't think through what would happen if partner was a minimum and didn't realize that 4n shows the quantitative invite.

Then there is something like:

2♠ (X) 3♠ (4♥)
4♠

So opener made a weak 2 bid, and then over the X the partner choose to raise to 3♠ but now over 4♥ the opener violates captaincy and makes another bid after their preempt. This is nearly always wrong

Spoiler

(excepting, maybe, some advanced walking the dog)

.

Another common bad auction I see does rely slightly on knowing something about your cards. I frequently see after a suit is agreed and 4nt key card is used, that someone will sign off at the 5 level with 4/5 key cards and the Q. They ask and find out they are only missing the one key card and then don't go. This nearly always means there was a mistake (either they shouldn't have used key card or they shouldn't have signed off at the 5 level).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think the idea is not a bad one, although I doubt you will
find lots of auctions, which are obviously wrong, quite often
you need at least an idea, which agreements were in place.

A typical auction will be ones, where one sides showes an
inv. hand, making a NF bid, and after p just showed min and
a pure preference presses on to game. (*)

And the question is now - was the NF bid the error (was the
hand way too strong?), or was the pressing on the error.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: (*) There are of course hands, which justify going on to
game, due some brilliant interferences, but those hands are
rare.

[helene_t]

An auction I have seen a couple of times on Vugraph is:

(2♠)-3♦-(4♠)-5♦
(pass)-6♦

Here I suppose there is some logic to the 6♦ bid:
1) 3♦ shows a wide range. If the 5♦ bid must be based on the expectation that 5♦ makes, a maximum 3♦ bidder may think 6♦ is likely on.
2) The 4♠ bid may mark the 5♦ bidder with spade shortage.

Still I think it is a bid that shouldn't exist. It begs the question what the 5♦ bidder is supposed to do if he wants to stretch to 5♦, or even sacrifice against 4♠. (OK, KenRexford might play 4NT as Lebensohl )

[mohitz]

Mbodell, on Jan 29 2010, 04:00 PM, said:

Then there is something like:

2♠ (X) 3♠ (4♥)
4♠

Even worse is the auction i saw a few days back.

2♠ - (p) - p - (X)
3♠ - (X) - All Pass

[ochinko]

1♠ - 2♠
4NT - ?

When this happens to me I just pass. You can't have a balanced hand if you didn't open 2♣ so if my simple raise excites you so much that you suddenly want to play a slam I expect to see a new suit at the table (with or without a jump), not RKCB.

[wank]

One hopes your partners never pick up Axxxxx A AKQxx x or some such

[helene_t]

ochinko, on Jan 29 2010, 02:01 PM, said:

1♠ - 2♠
4NT - ?

When this happens to me I just pass. You can't have a balanced hand if you didn't open 2♣ so if my simple raise excites you so much that you suddenly want to play a slam I expect to see a new suit at the table (with or without a jump), not RKCB.

Disagree, I think Kxxxxxx-KQJx-A-A is consistent with that auction.

[jjbrr]

spite passes of partner's slam tries are a good way to disrupt partnership harmony.

[pooltuna]

jjbrr, on Jan 29 2010, 10:46 AM, said:

spite passes of partner's slam tries are a good way to disrupt partnership harmony.

I thought that was the idea

[vuroth]

ochinko, on Jan 29 2010, 08:01 AM, said:

1♠ - 2♠
4NT - ?

When this happens to me I just pass. You can't have a balanced hand if you didn't open 2♣ so if my simple raise excites you so much that you suddenly want to play a slam I expect to see a new suit at the table (with or without a jump), not RKCB.

Hate to derail the thread a bit more, but aren't there a whole host of strong 2-suited hands that partner might chose to open at the 1 level, rather than go through 2 clubs?

[manudude03]

One I saw recently

1♦-1♠
1NT-2♠
2NT

NT bidder had singleton spade, but otherwise nothing he had already shown.

with regards to the 2M-P-P-X-3M auctions, why does it usually seem like opener nearly has a 2♣ opener when that happens, been stung a few times by that.


1♦-1♠
4♣*-4♥**
4♠-P

* Gerber
** 1 Ace

1. Please don't play 4♣ as gerber here
2. Don't ask for aces (or key cards) when you need more info.

After the hand, opener said something along the lines of "sorry partner, I couldn't tell if you had 6 points or 12". Responder had a 12 count (I think) and said she didn't want to check again for slam incase they were off 2 aces (reasonable).

[helene_t]

Yeah I remember that 2nd auction, Wayne. But the auction is not impossible. What is impossible (well in most situations at least) is to ask for aces and then sign off in game missing one ace.

[karlson]

Mbodell, on Jan 29 2010, 02:30 AM, said:

Then there is something like:

2♠ (X) 3♠ (4♥)
4♠

So opener made a weak 2 bid, and then over the X the partner choose to raise to 3♠ but now over 4♥ the opener violates captaincy and makes another bid after their preempt.  This is nearly always wrong

Spoiler

(excepting, maybe, some advanced walking the dog)

.

I have to admit that I've seen this type of auction a couple of times from top polish pairs, and it was right every time. Of course it violates beginner maxims, but sometimes the 2♠ bidder has a lot more offense than expected. As a compromise, I've started playing double here as "I want to bid 4♠ unless you have this beat".

Of course beginners will still do well never to reproduce this auction, but also, beginners will do well to think of what's going on in the auction and what contract they want to play as opposed to following rules.

[PhantomSac]

karlson, on Jan 29 2010, 12:55 PM, said:

Mbodell, on Jan 29 2010, 02:30 AM, said:

Then there is something like:

2♠ (X) 3♠ (4♥)
4♠

So opener made a weak 2 bid, and then over the X the partner choose to raise to 3♠ but now over 4♥ the opener violates captaincy and makes another bid after their preempt.  This is nearly always wrong

Spoiler

(excepting, maybe, some advanced walking the dog)

.

I have to admit that I've seen this type of auction a couple of times from top polish pairs, and it was right every time. Of course it violates beginner maxims, but sometimes the 2♠ bidder has a lot more offense than expected. As a compromise, I've started playing double here as "I want to bid 4♠ unless you have this beat".

Of course beginners will still do well never to reproduce this auction, but also, beginners will do well to think of what's going on in the auction and what contract they want to play as opposed to following rules.

Yeah I agree this auction is definitely possible, but it should not be used by beginners, and should not be used with any hand that would be opened a traditional weak 2.

[manudude03]

Impossible is probably the wrong word for all these auctions. There's nothing in the laws that say you're not allowed to have an auction like 1NT-2C-7NT. Inconsistent might be the better word for it.

Another auction I remember having once was:

3S-4NT
5S

and left me wondering what to do with my 4 key cards.

A vugraph auction last year (junior camrose- not me):

P-P-1♥-4♦
4♥-P-P-5♦
P-P-5♥-6♦
X-AP

[ArtK78]

I heard about this one from a friend of mine with a good sense of the absurd.

Playing in a local team match (one of those events that plays out over several months), he heard the opponents commit the following auction:

P - 1♠
6♠

He turned to the third seat 1♠ opener and asked, "Is that Drury?"

[hotShot]

ochinko, on Jan 29 2010, 02:01 PM, said:

1♠ - 2♠
4NT - ?

When this happens to me I just pass. You can't have a balanced hand if you didn't open 2♣ so if my simple raise excites you so much that you suddenly want to play a slam I expect to see a new suit at the table (with or without a jump), not RKCB.

Well I disagree, opener could have a strong 2 suited hand that does not qualify for a 2♣ opening.

[NickRW]

Another one on a similar theme to some of the others:

2♥, weak - P - P- X
P - 3♣ - P - P
3♥ - P - 3NT - X

3♥ = violation of captaincy
3NT = your side is outgunned and now you think NT is less dangerous???