[rhm]

MarkDean, on Feb 17 2010, 12:09 AM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 16 2010, 09:56 PM, said:

MarkDean, on Feb 16 2010, 08:44 PM, said:

I think 5♥ is clear - this hand is terrible in the context of the auction.  Partner has shortness opposite half of our hand.

The context of the auction involves us showing the weakest possible 2NT opening with 3 hearts and partner making a further slam try. Given that, how bad is our hand?

In my opinion, it is still terrible.
I suppose you could make similar, worse hands, QJx QJx KJ AKQJx, but basically we have the least HCP possible in partner's three suits, including two jacks, and no aces. That is really bad.

Mark seems to be the only one, who can sensibly evaluate a Bridge hand in context.

Rainer Herrmann

[mcphee]

I think we should have bid 4C over 3S, although this may not solve the problem it would have helped. This is not a bad hand at all for H.

I regret to say I do not have the balls for 5D now as much as it appeals after my failure to bid 4C. Qxxx AQxxx Kxx x is going to land us in a minus position, although the lack of a 4C cue bid may slow partner down.

[hanp]

I think 5D now is clear. AKQJx is really not that bad opposite a singleton, it's usually 5 tricks! Our heart support is also good and we have a control in the suit partner skipped. In terms of strength 5D seems exactly right.

[Echognome]

hanp, on Feb 17 2010, 08:51 AM, said:

AKQJx is really not that bad opposite a singleton, it's usually 5 tricks!

Especially when the x is a T!

[hanp]

If it was a T Justin wouldn't have written x don't you think?

Oh I see he just edited. (and so did mike777 and lmilne, stop bugging me Matt!)

[Jlall]

hanp, on Feb 17 2010, 11:55 AM, said:

If it was a T Justin wouldn't have written x don't you think?

Oh I see he just edited. (and so did mike777 and lmilne, stop bugging me Matt!)

lol hanp humor

[Jlall]

wank, on Feb 16 2010, 04:29 PM, said:

xxxx AQxxx Axx x = claim at t1. mark me down for 5D

This was pretty sick, that was my hand exactly (plus the heart ten).

[jdonn]

rhm, on Feb 17 2010, 07:27 AM, said:

MarkDean, on Feb 17 2010, 12:09 AM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 16 2010, 09:56 PM, said:

MarkDean, on Feb 16 2010, 08:44 PM, said:

I think 5♥ is clear - this hand is terrible in the context of the auction.  Partner has shortness opposite half of our hand.

The context of the auction involves us showing the weakest possible 2NT opening with 3 hearts and partner making a further slam try. Given that, how bad is our hand?

In my opinion, it is still terrible.
I suppose you could make similar, worse hands, QJx QJx KJ AKQJx, but basically we have the least HCP possible in partner's three suits, including two jacks, and no aces. That is really bad.

Mark seems to be the only one, who can sensibly evaluate a Bridge hand in context.

Rainer Herrmann

Do not agree. We are 3325 when we might be 3334 or 3343. We have AKQJT opposite shortness of clubs when we might have AKJxx or something. We have the control partner denied. Our jack of hearts protects against a bad break. Our diamonds fit since partner will be weak in the black suits. And we already said we didn't have a maximum for hearts.

Failing to show some kind of interest when it doesn't even increase the level is a bad mistake IMO!

[whereagles]

I find pard's bidding somewhat strange... could he have, say?...

QJxx
AQxxx
Kxx
x

or

JTxx
AQxxxx
Kxx
--

Perhaps I should just bid 5♥, given I haven't the ♦A.

[gnasher]

whereagles, on Feb 21 2010, 09:46 AM, said:

I find pard's bidding somewhat strange... could he have, say?...

QJxx
AQxxx
Kxx
x

As Josh has already said, responder would have bid Keycard with that, rather than confuse the issue with 5♣. Opener will usually have a top spade, but when he doesn't slam is still likely to make on a non-spade lead. The only hand I can think of where it won't have reasonable play is xxx KJx AQJ AKQx.

Quote

or

JTxx
AQxxxx
Kxx
--

That's of more concern, if he can have that hand. What do people play 2NT-3♦;3♥-3♠ as?

[lamford]

gnasher, on Feb 21 2010, 05:25 AM, said:

Quote

or

JTxx
AQxxxx
Kxx
--

That's of more concern, if he can have that hand. What do people play 2NT-3♦;3♥-3♠ as?

Many different things I suspect; and we should assume 4 spades, 5+ hearts unless we are told otherwise.

I think a club void is extremely likely as the dog did not bark in the night. I think 5D now should be reverse last train - either slam force or sign off. This releases 5H to be last train, and seems to have no technical downside. On this point, whenever X is last train, it must be right to play it as reverse. Without that agreement, I would also bid 5D, last-train.

[FrancesHinden]

Maybe I just don't understand this Italian cue-bidding style thing, but if I cued 5D here I would expect to end up in slam missing either two aces or the AK of diamonds.

We know from partner's club cue that it's shortage, so to make slam you need (i) the A of diamonds opposite and (ii) the AQ of hearts and (iii) either the SQ or the DK to get up to 12 tricks (and don't forget spades might be 5-1, so any slam that's "on a finesse" is actually worse than that). If partner has all of that he would probably just have got RKCB out over 4H.

[PhantomSac]

FrancesHinden, on Feb 24 2010, 04:15 PM, said:

Maybe I just don't understand this Italian cue-bidding style thing, but if I cued 5D here I would expect to end up in slam missing either two aces or the AK of diamonds.

We know from partner's club cue that it's shortage, so to make slam you need (i) the A of diamonds opposite and (ii) the AQ of hearts and (iii) either the SQ or the DK to get up to 12 tricks (and don't forget spades might be 5-1, so any slam that's "on a finesse" is actually worse than that). If partner has all of that he would probably just have got RKCB out over 4H.

Why do you need iii? You need iii to make slam almost cold, but it is very good opposite just the DA and HAQ since they won't always lead a diamond. Also even on a diamond lead you are almost 100 % if partner has ATx.

Also, how can you be off the AK of diamonds here? You have all the club honors, and the QJ of diamonds. If partner has no diamond control he has at most QJ AQ in the majors which is not enough to move over 4H.

[MarkDean]

PhantomSac, on Feb 24 2010, 02:19 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Feb 24 2010, 04:15 PM, said:

Maybe I just don't understand this Italian cue-bidding style thing, but if I cued 5D here I would expect to end up in slam missing either two aces or the AK of diamonds.

We know from partner's club cue that it's shortage, so to make slam you need (i) the A of diamonds opposite and (ii) the AQ of hearts and (iii) either the SQ or the DK to get up to 12 tricks (and don't forget spades might be 5-1, so any slam that's "on a finesse" is actually worse than that). If partner has all of that he would probably just have got RKCB out over 4H.

Why do you need iii? You need iii to make slam almost cold, but it is very good opposite just the DA and HAQ since they won't always lead a diamond. Also even on a diamond lead you are almost 100 % if partner has ATx.

Also, how can you be off the AK of diamonds here? You have all the club honors, and the QJ of diamonds. If partner has no diamond control he has at most QJ AQ in the majors which is not enough to move over 4H.

Why would partner not move with QJxx AQxxx xxxx --? Take the hand from the OP and switch the minors and slam is extremely good. (Of course if pd has that hand we are down in 5...)

But I believe Frances was implying we might be off the diamond AK but not the ace of spades in her view of cue bidding, i.e. pd could have AJxx AQxxx xxx x and is fishing for a diamond cue bid.

[PhantomSac]

MarkDean, on Feb 24 2010, 11:58 PM, said:

Why would partner not move with QJxx AQxxx xxxx --?  Take the hand from the OP and switch the minors and slam is extremely good.  (Of course if pd has that hand we are down in 5...)

But I believe Frances was implying we might be off the diamond AK but not the ace of spades in her view of cue bidding, i.e. pd could have AJxx AQxxx xxx x and is fishing for a diamond cue bid.

With QJxx AQxxx xxxx --- if partner chose to bid 5C, then over 5D surely it would sign off? I also don't think this hand should move over 4H but obv it's just a gamble on fitting well in the minors and could work out, but I really think after 5C you've done enough and if slam is good parnter will bid it.

Dunno if Frances meant what you said but bypassing a spade control because you are fishing for a certain cue to me is not partnership bridge, if you don't cuebid spades then you don't have a spade control imo, so partner is not going to cooperate if he also doesn't have a spade control. I have seen people write about cuebidding 1 below the suit you want cuebid, but to me this is just an operation.

[gnasher]

Frances plays cue-bids the same way as the rest of us do. Her partner has denied a spade control.

Do all the 5♦ bidders mean it as Last Train, or is it systemically a cue-bid? If it's Last Train, it seems obvious; if it's a cue bid, it's does carry some risk.

If partner is 5431, it's probably OK to cue-bid 5♦, because partner can't have enough to accept unless he has ♦A, or forgot to bid RKCB on the previous round. The hands where there's a risk of reaching a two-loser slam are those where partner is 6-4, eg QJxx AQxxxx xx x or Q10xx AQxxxx xxx -.

[PhantomSac]

IMO 5D shows a spade control. 5D showing a diamond control as well as a spade control seems much worse. I guess this is what last train means in this context.