[mr1303]

---

2C was strong and artifical, 2H was an artificial negative (0-3 ish).

Who is most to blame for missing the good 6D?

[aguahombre]

Most of those who employ 2H as an artificial negative deny an ace or king. We don't use the 2H convention at all, but I can imagine that might have been a slam killer here.

Opening 2C with a 2-suiter is not my favorite thing either, but that has been hammered out plenty on these fora.

[whereagles]

I blame the system. Play precision or polish club.

[mgoetze]

50% system 30% South 20% East.

[nigel_k]

Agree with aguahombre that I wouldn't use double negative on that North hand, but not sure if this is system or judgment. Anyway, North should do more over 4♦ - either 4NT or 5♣ instead of 5♦. South's bidding is fine IMO.

[mr1303]

A quick aside, presumably 4D is 100% forcing? That being the case, surely North can be a great deal weaker than her actual hand...

e.g. xxxxx x xxx xxxx?

[guido]

I agree with those who point to the 2H bid. If one is going to use this convention, holding a King (and no possible total misfit in whatever suits partner happens to hold as a bonus), this hand does not -- or at least should not -- qualify as a negative.

If, for some reason 2H is the proper call in the system, then certainly 5D is wrong.

[kenrexford]

First of all, this is a very unusual "double negative" if a King is possible. Most play that the call denies a King or as much as two Queens. But, an agreement does not cause the disaster if the agreement is not at fault. Many of those who claim system fault so far seem biased by a love of their own techniques rather than offering a fair critique of the sequence.

North seems to be wildly at fault, IMO.

I can accept that somehow a 4♦ call immediately after this 4♣ intervention might somehow not be right. It seems a stretch to not bid here, but I do not see this as the errant call most worthy of underlining.

The errant call is bidding only 5♦ with this hand. Sure -- Responder could have a better hand in this sequence, perhaps ♠xxxxx ♥x ♦Kxxx ♣xxx. But, this is a really good hand, contextually. Partner has bid to the four-level on his own. But, more importantly, Responder has already limited his hand, such that making moves with this hand will not likely be seen as promising Aces that were hiding earlier.

The question faced by Responder might have been how to show this hand. The options were 4♥, 4♠, 4NT, 5♣, 5♦, and something that forced slam. 4♥ is out, because this would be a mere preference bid. 5♦ is out because this is semi-forced. So, what would 4♠, 4NT, or 5♣ show?

I can accept that 4♠ might be construed as a spade card, as that will come up and is useful.

I can also accept that 5♣ might be construed as club shortness, as this also might well come up and is potentially useful (Opener could have 0-6-5-2, for instance). Of course, someone always has club shortness in most auctions like this, but fair enough.

What I cannot grasp would be a conclusion that 4NT is some sort of idiotic ace-asking call here. Why on earth would Responder, known to have at most one King, ever be allowed to ask for Aces? I don't care if the convention card specifically said that 4NT is ace-asking after initially bidding 2♥, as the convention card must have been written out wrong.

So, what is 4NT? IMO, this is OBVIOUSLY the catch-all "red cue." "I have a raise to 5♦, partner, but I have a red card that you might want/need for slam." That alone does the trick.

If Opener had needed even more, he could even "Last Train" back a 5♣ nudge if Responder bids 4NT.

So, 0% system, 100% North for not bidding 4NT. (If 4NT is systemically ALWAYS asking for Aces, AND if 4♠/5♣ show indicated external controls with no ability to show internal controls, then 100% system.)

[nige1]

mr1303 wrote
2C was strong and artificial, 2H was an artificial negative (0-3 ish).
Who is most to blame for missing the good 6D?

Agree with KenRexford.
North is just worth a positive over 2♣
Over 4♦, North should bid 4N or 5♣ to show slam interest.

---

[Cyberyeti]

whereagles, on 2011-July-05, 16:21, said:

I blame the system. Play precision or polish club.

So the auction goes 1♣-P-1♦-(3♣)-3♥-(4♣)-P-P-4♦ so you're better off how ?

I agree 4N should be a good 0-3 here.

[han]

Responder bid like he had xxxx xx xxxx xxx, guess whose blame it is. Mr1303 you know better than to post a hand like this.

LOL at blaming the system.

[Free]

North doesn't have a negative imo. Even if it's systemic, I blame North for being lazy afterwards.

[whereagles]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-06, 01:22, said:

So the auction goes 1♣-P-1♦-(3♣)-3♥-(4♣)-P-P-4♦ so you're better off how ?

I was being sarcastic

[aguahombre]

whereagles, on 2011-July-06, 06:45, said:

I was being sarcastic

Obviously, using emoticons when attempting sarcasm or humor does not help; my solution is not to bother and just let people think what they want to about my alleged sanity or intentions.

[WellSpyder]

kenrexford, on 2011-July-05, 17:25, said:

I can accept that somehow a 4♦ call immediately after this 4♣ intervention might somehow not be right. It seems a stretch to not bid here, but I do not see this as the errant call most worthy of underlining.

I'm surprised this pass hasn't come in for more criticism (Ken seems the only one to complain about it at all, rather than simply complain about 2♥ and 5♦). Given the general view that N is either maximum or above maximum for his earlier bid, the auction is already GF and North has an excellent suit of his own, what possible advantage is there in not showing it at this stage?

[Cyberyeti]

aguahombre, on 2011-July-06, 09:10, said:

Obviously, using emoticons when attempting sarcasm or humor does not help; my solution is not to bother and just let people think what they want to about my alleged sanity or intentions.

Using an emoticon I don't recognise means I miss the sarcasm, what is anyway.

[Zelandakh]

Right-click the emoticon and select properties. The title will describe it, in this case "cool". You can also come up with this information by selecting show all emoticons to the right of the Fast Reply window and mousing over them.

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2011-July-06, 11:22, said:

Right-click the emoticon and select properties. The title will describe it, in this case "cool". You can also come up with this information by selecting show all emoticons to the right of the Fast Reply window and mousing over them.

Cool was the only one I knew with shades, and wasn't one I associated with sarcasm.

[pooltuna]

don't make negative bids over 2♣ with a control card the 2♥ call should promise no(zero) controls.