[jillybean]

Partner opens 1st seat, 1N (15-17), you hold

AQT4, KQ98752, Void, AJ

How will you bid this?

[mikeh]

My first thought was texas then exclusion, but the diamond Ace is worth as much as the club K.

I am going to transfer to hearts and then splinter, and then keep going no matter what partner does.....so:

4♦  4♥
4♠  ?

He should own to the club King or the diamond Ace, and won't cue the diamond K.

Over a 5♣ bid, I bid 5♦, then bid 6♣ over 5♥, and respect a signoff

Over a 5♦ bid, I bid 6♣, and respect a signoff.

It will be up to partner to bid the grand with, for example: Kxx Axx QJxx KQx...not impossible on these sequences.

[ONEferBRID]

You have a minimum 9 card fit and no 2 quick losers in the side suits:
1NT - 4D!
4H - 5D! = voidwood-after-Texas
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Edit: I just re-read Mike's reply... he does have a point about the value of the Diam Ace.... and it would sure be nice to find out about the Sp King.

[jillybean]

Thanks. 6 is straight forward, I couldn't see an intelligent way to 7 but I see we can make it easier for partner to bid the grand.

Mike, I assume you meant to say you would transfer to hearts and then cue, not splinter. If 1N:4♦ 4♥:4♠ is a cue how do you play 1N:2♦ 2♥:4♠

Since adding kickback I am missing the the ability to cue bid at the game level, perhaps here I can have it both ways.

[rogerclee]

I would just drive to 7 opposite the ♥A via exclusion. IMO there is no need to have such a delicate auction. If partner has the HA

1) Sometimes partner will misjudge on a cuebidding auction where 7H is cold (nobody said having a cuebidding auction to 7 when one of you has a void is easy).
2) Even when he has a bad hand that rightfully should not bid 7H, the grand can be pretty good to cold (Kx Axx KQxx Kxxx for example).
3) It is basically impossible that 7H is worse than on a hook (and often has some other small extra chances).

[jdonn]

I'm with clee.

[gwnn]

jillybean, on Apr 25 2010, 12:41 AM, said:

Since adding kickback I am missing the the ability to cue bid at the game level, perhaps here I can have it both ways.

When you play kickback in hearts 4♠ is key card and 4NT is whatever 4♠ was. After Texas, 4♠ is usually exclusion in spades. I have no idea about

1NT-2♦
2♥-4♠/4NT then? interesting.

[whereagles]

Lacking voidwoods or what not, I'll just transfer and trot out ol' black in a noob-like way. If pard has 2 aces, I'll bid 7. Else, settle for 6.

With gadgets it's way easier, of course.

[ONEferBRID]

I've got a gadget.
And let's say you discover Opener doesn't have a Diam Ctrl, then Voidwood would not be necessary:

Kxx,    Ax,         QJxx,   KQxx ( Opener )

AQT4, KQ98752, Void, AJ ( Responder)

1NT - 2D!
2H - 3C!( GF; either 2nd suit or long Hts and no real Cl suit )
3D!* ( only 2 ♥, but 4 or 5 ♣ ) - 3H! ( long Hts, no real Cl suit )
3S ( cue, A or K ) - 4C ( cue )
4H ( denies ♦ Ctrl ) - 4NT ( RKC for Hts )
5D ( 1 key ) - 5NT ( specific K-ask)
6C ( ♣ K ) - 7H

____________________________________
*other options for Opener's rebid:
3H = 3 ♥ but no 4 or 5 ♣
3NT = 2 ♥ and no 4 or 5 ♣
4C! both 3 ♥ and 4 or 5 ♣

[Mbodell]

mikeh, on Apr 24 2010, 11:29 AM, said:

My first thought was texas then exclusion

What do people play the following auctions as:

1nt - 2♦ - 2♥ - 5♦

versus

1nt - 4♦ - 4♥ - 5♦

Is forum expert standard that only the second is exclusion?

[Phil]

Mbodell, on Apr 25 2010, 03:05 PM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 24 2010, 11:29 AM, said:

My first thought was texas then exclusion

What do people play the following auctions as:

1nt - 2♦ - 2♥ - 5♦

versus

1nt - 4♦ - 4♥ - 5♦

Is forum expert standard that only the second is exclusion?

I know in the 1st auction Meckwell plays 5x as a "response" to RKC. Haven't seen anyone else do it but I think its very cool. I would say the standard is exclusion.

In the second 5x is just a cuebid.

[Winstonm]

Transfer to spades and then Keycard. If he shows 3 bid 7H?

[ONEferBRID]

Mbodell, on Apr 25 2010, 03:05 PM, said:

mikeh, on Apr 24 2010, 11:29 AM, said:

My first thought was texas then exclusion

What do people play the following auctions as:

1nt - 2♦ - 2♥ - 5♦

versus

1nt - 4♦ - 4♥ - 5♦

Is forum expert standard that only the second is exclusion?

In the 1st, Phil is right about 5♦ being a RKC "showing" in Meckwell ( I think its cool too ) ... and why is it not Exclusion? ... because the 2nd ( over Texas ) is Exclusion-RKC !.
Similarly, 4NT over Texas is RKC.

[mike777]

jillybean, on Apr 24 2010, 02:00 PM, said:

Partner opens 1st seat, 1N (15-17), you hold

AQT4, KQ98752, Void, AJ

How will you bid this?

JB tough to get to 7...there is room for misunderstandings.

I would start with 2d(trf) then jump to 4d.........I assume playing 2d and then 3d is gf so a jump to 4d should be a splinter.


1nt=2d!
2h=4d!


this will allow pard to rkc with 4s(kickback)now, responder shows useful void now over kickback and 3 if possible.

If you have discussed exclusion to a great degree, almost none of us have, then that may be the way to go.....but......

Still easy to miss 7 here.

[jillybean]

mike777, on Apr 25 2010, 03:35 PM, said:

If you have discussed exclusion to a great degree, almost none of us have, then that may be the way to go.....but......

Still easy to miss 7 here.

What is there to discuss ? 0,1,2 response.

Exclusion seems to be the one convention that has only 1 level of response so you can play it without long discussions regarding follow ups. What am I missing?

I will post the complete deal when I get back to my own PC.

[mike777]

jillybean, on Apr 25 2010, 10:47 PM, said:

mike777, on Apr 25 2010, 03:35 PM, said:

If you have discussed exclusion to a great degree, almost none of us have, then that may be the way to go.....but......

Still easy to miss 7 here.

What is there to discuss ? 0,1,2 response.

Exclusion seems to be the one convention that has only 1 level of response so you can play it without long discussions regarding follow ups. What am I missing?

I will post the complete deal when I get back to my own PC.

ok if you know what the responses are to exclusion great




Ok If you know what an exclusion bid is on this deal...great........


I tried to make the point that most..if not all of us do not.......I mean more than a few hundreds/thousand......out of world

I would not.....but I fully grant exclusion bw comes on so rare.........very rare..for me...

------------


so I fall back on kickback
I fully grant I have never had this auction.....

\-------------------

otoh if for you this is a easy auction in your style....great.....

[chasetb]

Since we are in Advanced/Expert, I doubt anyone else uses this, as most probably play 3-1-(5-4) or something else. But this hand would be perfect for 1NT-3♥, which is GF for Hearts and asks for Opener's Cheapest Ace Cuebid (3NT is A♥). Responder can then rebid 4♥ to play, Cuebid his next Ace, or use Kickback. It has come up twice in the past year for me, both tops- the first helped find 7, the other let us make 6 when my ♦K couldn't be finessed on opening lead.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on Apr 24 2010, 07:41 PM, said:

Thanks. 6 is straight forward, I couldn't see an intelligent way to 7 but I see we can make it easier for partner to bid the grand.

Mike, I assume you meant to say you would transfer to hearts and then cue, not splinter. If 1N:4♦ 4♥:4♠ is a cue how do you play 1N:2♦ 2♥:4♠

Since adding kickback I am missing the the ability to cue bid at the game level, perhaps here I can have it both ways.

No: I meant to say transfer to hearts then splinter: the misunderstanding crept in because the auction I then gave began with the splinter.....4♦ was a splinter, having transferred to 2♥.

For those who just drive to grand via exclusion over 4♦, I think that this is just wrong. Why can't partner hold Jxxx Ax KQJx KJx, as one simple example? Grand needing a finesse and a trump break is less than 50% (anyone who has never had a suit break 4-0 lives a charmed life), and that's bad bidding in anyone's book. xxx AJx AQJx QJx is another plausible hand...now of course the trump suit is irrelevant, but this is a very poor grand indeed.

In fact, most hands on which he lacks the spade King will be a sub-par grand.

And even something like Kxx Ax KQxx KJxx is not cold.

I don't claim my solution is fool-proof either, but since I get to drive slowly to at least 6, making grand slam tries along the way, I involve my partner in the decision, while giving him clues as to what cards will be valuable.

Having said that, if I didn't trust partner, I'd go the exclusion route.