[temp3600]

Hello,

Here's a board i played witch raised some thoughts :

Scoring: MP

South North
1D 1S
1NT 3H*
3NT 4S
P

* : natural, game forcing, at least 5 spades and 4 hearts ; 2H would not have been forcing

---

We were vulnerable against not at MP, playing french standard, which is very close to SAYC. I know this sequence may not be very efficient, but please try to answer the first questions as though you were playing SAYC.

First, about the 4S bid :

1a) 4S shows a (game forcing) hand with at least 6 spades and 4 hearts. what's the upper limit ? (in term of losing tricks count for example)

1b) related question : is 4S a "closing bid", like 1NT - 3NT, or can/must opener make a move towards slam with some appropriate hands ?

Now, about the slam try:

2) my partner and I couldn't solve this issue : responder has great playing strengh, yet he sees that the 5 level may be too high. On the other hand, opener cannot see the big picture like reponder can, but he somehow knows the 5 level is safe because of the minor aces. what do you think about it : is it clearly the responsibility of one of the two hands to make a move towards slam (which one ?), is this formulation not tackling the problem the right way, etc. ?

3) where can i find a good checkback or double checkback structure after 1x - 1M - 1NT, and how would you bid these two hands after a 1D - 1S - 1NT start ?

All comments, pieces of advice, criticism are welcome.

Michael

[Free]

Welcome to the forum!

1a) I don't think you can call this a GF bid, since it's not forcing, and you're already at the Game level
1b) I would consider it to play. Can be strong because of the distribution...

2) I think North has the big hand: 4 losers at most, and ALL honours are usefull. After a 1-level opening, slam has a big chance. The only thing you need is minor Aces, you can ask about them (I hope) and therefor I'm willing to risk 5M instead of 4M when no slam is possible, and finding slam when it actually is possible.

3) You have several ways of checkback. This is how it would be in my system (a bit artificial):
1♣ - 1♠
1NT - 2♣*
2♦(1) - 2♥**
2NT(2) - 3♠***
4♦(3) - 6♠

* = relay, inv+
(1) = min without 3 card ♠ or 4333
** = relay, asks if p has 4333 or min without ♠ support (GF when he bids again)
(2) = 2-3-4-4, min
*** = RKC ♠
(3) = 2 keycards with ♠ trumps

[inquiry]

Easiest question first, where can you find a good checkback method.

Look up xyz convention, plenty of good sites. Here is just one....
XYZ convention

Upper limit on 4S bid, is just below good slam try values. You could have made a slam try by temporizing now in a minor.

Is 4S a signoff bid? Yes, more or less. With slam try you would do something else. If responder has surpirze values (Aces in teh minor, good heart card, he might make another move, but this would be surpise. You figure he is 2-3 in majors at best on this auction). For isntance if his diamond Q was the heart Q, I would not pass 4S.. both aces in the minor, good heart fitting card.... but this is problem with the 3H jump... see xyz convention

Only north can make slam try, south has nothing special. In fact, he ahs a pretty bleak hand, 12 hcp, two card fit. It takes genius south or mad man south to bid on over 4S.. Now if noth cue-bids 4Cs.... And welcome to the BBF.

Ben

[whereagles]

Playing the French standard, North's 4S is not a shut out. It invites South to go on with a suitable hand. Auctions like

1D 1S
1NT 3H
3NT 4H

or

1D 1S
1NT 3H
3NT 4S

are slam invites, though not-forcing. To play just game, South's bidding would be respectively

1D 1S
1NT 4H

or

1D 1S
1NT 4S

This being said, South's actual hand hasn't not much to spare in the present auction. He has good controls in the minor suits, but support for the majors is minimal. The risk of two major suit losers or 1 major suit loser plus a minor suit loser (South doesn't know North is 6-5), is high, so pass to 4S seems reasonable.

However, in terms of the losing trick count, North has 4 losers and South's min hand cover card expectancy is 3 covers, so slam rates to make. The problem is how to ask for aces, though, since the 4NT bid isn't always for aces in French standard. For instance

1D 1S
1NT 4NT is quantitative

1D 1S
1NT 3H
3NT 4NT is quantitative as well

That leaves us with something like

1D 1S
1NT 4C <--- this can't be natural (3C bid available), so must be some sort of spade slam try
4D 4NT <--- now this must be an ace-ask for spades
5H 6S

Another way is to use the Roudi 2C gadget, which, I believe, is what people play in France

1D 1S
1NT 2C
2D 3H <--- 55, game-force, stronger than a direct 3H
3NT 4H <--- invites South to bid slam at any sort of excuse

This last idea requires some agreements with pard, though. (It could be that this isn't even the French "book" way to bid the hand.)

Humm... long post. Hope temp3600 reads it all

[Flame]

i edit this because , i just had a chance to read the post before me, and it make sense to play like that.
this was my original:
Im not sure 3h in sayc is forcing, the way i play it, is inv, and to get a GF must go with checkback.
to your questions
1. 4sp is a sign up, i dont think opener can ever bid more since his hand is limit, responder his the captain. upper limit is the hand which u think slam is not good enough to look for,anyway opener doesnt have a say here.
2. I dont see why the 5 level isnt safe, ofcourse its not 100% safe, but partner opened and u can more then hope he got something, 5 level is 90% safe and that enough. also how can responder see the 5 level is safe ? aces are not everything.
he might be going down in 3sp/4sp with the info he has.
The blaim is 0% for the opener, the rest (make it whatever u like) is responder's.
3. if 3h is GF maybe u dont need a checkback for this hand. if u do use checkback how about using this 3h for 5/5 instead, and use the checkback for those 5/4 or less GF.

This post has been edited by Flame: 2004-July-27, 10:16

[inquiry]

hi Flame..

SAYC does not use new minor forcing or check back. So a jump to 3H is absolutely forcing. If you are using a check back, you are not really playing SAYC. To see what is defined as SAYC see this short booklet on it by the ACBL...

http://www.acbl.org/...y/sayc_book.pdf

This is of course not meant to be critical. In reality SAYC is unplayable, which is why people add things like check back to it.When I find an SAYC parntenr, I try to talk them into check back as a "modification".

Ben

[Rebound]

An on-topic question for the experts:

I would like your opinion of bidding 1H over 1D with the intention of reversing into spades. If you consider this a reasonable idea, I would also be curious to know how you would forsee the auction progressing from there.

[temp3600]

Thanks everyone for your comments (and the welcome !). whereagles, i read all of your post . I suspected that 4S was less signoff in the french system than in sayc.
Anyway, i will look into checkback systems, which seem to be able to economize a whole level of bidding on hands like these.

[1eyedjack]

Just a couple of general points.

With the limited armory at your disposal I would have thought that 4H is a more sensible bid than 4S. With 6-5 shape I would rather promise 5-5 shape than 6-4. Partner could be 1-3 in the majors here (ok, that is subject to agreement, but I think it is a sensible agreement). 4H presumably shows similar values to 4S, but I do not suggest that it would be any more effective at getting to slam on this hand.

It would never occur to me to respond 1H on this hand, so I have not spent a lot of time thinking how it would pan out, but somehow I would not expect anytning good coming out of it.

I feel that the key has to be getting across a game forcing 5-5 shape (or better) below game. Many of us make up our own checkback/NMF continuations.

Our auction would start out

1D - 1S
1N - 3S

Where 3S shows GF or better with 5-5 or better in the majors. You are a bid higher than 3H, which is quite irritating because it denies partner a 3S bid, but it more than compensates by showing the extra H and still forcing.
This post is not very helpful without access to all the continuations following a 1N rebid of which this forms a part. If there is any interest and I have time I shall post the rest of them. But most players who are interested in this sort of stuff are more than satisfied with their own methods. My methods are homegrown and far from standard here.

[luis]

To Rebound:

"I would like your opinion of bidding 1H over 1D with the intention of reversing into spades. If you consider this a reasonable idea, I would also be curious to know how you would forsee the auction progressing from there."

I think 1♥ would be atrocious. I don't think it would be reasonable. And I foresee the auction ending in some horrible way.

To the poster and others:

I think that 1s and 3h are both fine as long as both bids are forcing. Once south bids 3NT 4♠ is a mistake, the best bid by North may depend on your agreements but with such a freakish hand a leap to 6♥ is reasonable.

Luis

[the hog]

♠ AQJ98x
♥ AKTxx
♦ x
♣ x

♠ xx
♥ J9x
♦ AQxx
♣ AJxx

South North
1D 1S
1NT 3H*
3NT 4S
P

Try this auction
1D 1S
1N 2D ....2D = transfer to H
2H 3H ....3H shows 5H and is a gf
4C 4N ....4C is a courtesy cue bid, agreeing H - showing 3+ cards in support

[Cascade]

I would play this auction as a mild slam try.

If I did not want to try for slam with six spades I would just rebid 4♠. What I lose by missing a better heart fit I might gain from not giving away my hand.

I think that 4♥ is a better bid over 3NT. This would still be a slam try with a worse hand I would bid 4♥ rather than 3♥ on the previous round.

Basically if I make a forcing bid at the 3-level and then continue to the four-level I would play as slammish. With a worse hand I would just bid at the four-level directly.

[han]

I didn't find it in the link that inquiry posted, but I think that using XYZ an auction like 1D-1S-1NT-3H shows at least 5-5 in spades and hearts. With only 5-4 you would bid 2D (artificial game force).

I think that opener should continue with 4H, not 4C. It is true that you have two aces, but also a minimum hand and only one point in partner's suit. Responder should ask for keycards over 4H.

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Jul 29 2004, 11:10 AM, said:

I didn't find it in the link that inquiry posted,

I provided two links.. both are active and work (can someone else click on these and confirm?)... Two things might happen. You might have pop up blocker or something that is not letting the new link open in a new window. It might be opening but hides behind other windows.

You can try this.. roght click on the links and choose copy short cut. The go to a browser window and paste the shortcut there. The hit eneter and you will get to where I was pointing.

Ben

[bambi1]

inquiry, on Jul 29 2004, 03:17 PM, said:

I provided two links.. both are active and work (can someone else click on these and confirm?)...

Works for me !

[Fluffy]

Hey temp, on the french standard I know you are worng:

1m-1♠
1NT-3♥

is a 5+5+ hand.

Use roudi to show 5+-4 hands:

1♣-1♠
1NT-2♣
2♦/NT-3♥

If the response to roudi is 2♥/♠ you ahve ♠ fit so no real need to suggest ♥.

If the response was 2♦, 3♥ is a jump, 2♥ would show the 5-4 limit hand.

If the response is 2NT, 2NT is already game forcing, so 3♥ is forcing as well.

Hope this helps a bit

[Trpltrbl]

The_Hog, on Jul 27 2004, 06:01 PM, said:

♠ AQJ98x
♥ AKTxx
♦ x
♣ x

♠ xx
♥ J9x
♦ AQxx
♣ AJxx

South North
1D 1S
1NT 3H*
3NT 4S
P

Try this auction
1D 1S
1N 2D ....2D = transfer to H
2H 3H ....3H shows 5H and is a gf
4C 4N ....4C is a courtesy cue bid, agreeing H - showing 3+ cards in support

I like Ron's convention.

Mike

[han]

What I meant to say was:

I did find the links, but in the XYZ description, I didn't find whether 1D-1S-1NT-3H shows 5-4 or 5-5. In my opinion, it should be 5-5.

[Trpltrbl]

I play it as 5-5.

Mike