[Raff90]

This just happened at Cayne vs BBO Forums:

You've got:
♠Qxxxx
♥Kx
♦T
♣AKxxx

Partner:
♠A
♥AQJTx
♦Axx
♣QJTx

Its about the bidding: after i saw the bidding i wrote to the kibitzers how wrong i think it is to bid that way.
And then 2 "star" players wrote me that they think its ok and i will know in some years.
Pls explain me now why i am wrong, so here is the Bidding:
1♣-1♥
1♠-2♦
2♠-4♣
4♥-4NT
5♥-7♣

Ok nice they reached the most easy grand ever but still.
How can anyone think that the 1♣ opening is any good?
Why shouldnt you open your normal 1♠?
And the next thing which i thought was really wrong is that after 4♣ the 4♥ bid.
Why should you ever skip your ♦ cuebid here?
If your partner had different cards you might not reach 7♣ that easy.
So pls enlighten me BBO FORUM

[PhilKing]

I am probably going to regret answering based on the tone of your post, but ...

Just because most people open 1♠ does not mean 1♣ is terrible. Here it gained a lot of room and definition - contrast this start with 1♠-2♥-2♠ and note how much of a worse position we are in compared with 1♣-1♥-1♠-2♦-2♠.

Playing up the line cues is fine, but it's not the only way. If you cue 4♦ you can't show the heart king below the five level, yet heart king is relatively more important. Over 4♥ partner can count 13 tricks opposite the ♣AK regardless of the diamond position since in their style you don't cue a shortage in partner's suit. Lacking a diamond control partner can bid 4♠, since in their style style, they have not denied one. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that when they bid 4♥ they were using something called "judgment".

[mgoetze]

PhilKing, on 2012-December-29, 16:27, said:

compare this start with 1♠-2♥-2♠

Cherdano and I did start this way and it didn't seem terribly difficult to find 7♣ from there.

[jillybean]

I'm not going to comment about the auction but I do think your public criticism of the bidding while at the table was out of place.
I know kibitzers in general are brutal when it comes to mistakes they consider the players have made but as the host of
these games was playing at this table, I think your comments were inappropriate.

[PhilKing]

mgoetze, on 2012-December-29, 17:05, said:

Cherdano and I did start this way and it didn't seem terribly difficult to find 7♣ from there.

It wasn't, but congratulations.

[Fluffy]

The bdding posted is terrible, bidding 4♣ when 3♣ is enough, and bypassing diamond cuebid. I would bet I know who perpetrated it.

[Codo]

The bidding was great.

How can you critize the bidding without even knowing their style?

What about asking, trying to understand and then decide for yourself why these guys will outbid you (or me or most other players) in most hands?

[Raff90]

First:@Jillybean: Just because he is the creator of that TM means that im not allowed to judge his bidding?
It could have been Versace-Lauria and still would want to discuss it.
And kibitzers are there for discussion. It's not like i said that he is a bad player or anything. I just think it wasn't right there.
And if im wrong and kibitzers are only there for a teaparty and having nice conversations about politics etc then call the TM NAME after it.

@Codo: This has nothing to do with style. They played natural system. You're not judging it right.
If the hand would have been different and they would have played the 7♣ down one and 7♠ which is cold you sure would have critizied the bidding.

@Philking: Ofc you saved lots of room in the bidding. But if partner doesnt have GF or just a barely GF often might not find the right contract to play, because even if their agreement is to show 5/5 that way how do they show 5/6 then?
The cuebids i can understand that he could judge it that the ♥ cue is better. But that auction he kinda doesnt know lots about partner hand and i think shouldnt skip a cuebid.
I hope you still dont regret your post...

[gwnn]

Claiming at trick 1 (by the opposing team) seemed very strange to me. Did declarer send his line (to defenders) in private chat or something?

[Fluffy]

Damn I only guessed 50% of the pair composition

[PhilKing]

FWIW, Wests bidding in the other room was consistent with KQxxx xx x AKxxx. But that's OK because he opened a spade and showed a diamond control.

The auction in which they could count 13 tricks was clearly worse, because they opened the wrong suit and made the wrong cue bid.

[mgoetze]

Just so everyone can follow along, our auction was 1♠-2♥-2♠-2NT-3♣-4♣-4♦-4NT-5♥-7♣

PhilKing, on 2012-December-30, 15:06, said:

FWIW, Wests bidding in the other room was consistent with KQxxx xx x AKxxx. But that's OK because he opened a spade and showed a diamond control.

Only if you think 4♣ absolutely forced me to cuebid. I would not have liked your hypothetical hand half as much as my actual hand and might well just have bid 5♣ instead of 4♦ with it. But it's hard to say in retrospect, certainly 5♣ could also be wrong.

[rmnka447]

I think most players preference these days is to bid ♠ first with a 5-5 hand, but starting the bidding with 1 ♣ was more popular many years ago. So at this point, it's more a matter of style than anything else.

BTW, the 4 ♣ bid probably showed a really big hand with a great club fit. It allowed opener with a rather minimum hand to make a move toward slam.

[Cyberyeti]

Raff90, on 2012-December-29, 16:09, said:

Ok nice they reached the most easy grand ever but still.
How can anyone think that the 1♣ opening is any good?
Why shouldnt you open your normal 1♠?
And the next thing which i thought was really wrong is that after 4♣ the 4♥ bid.
Why should you ever skip your ♦ cuebid here?
If your partner had different cards you might not reach 7♣ that easy.
So pls enlighten me BBO FORUM

Maybe this is normal to you, it's actually old style Acol standard to open 1♣ on any black 5-5 although few people do it these days, also not everybody plays 4SF FG at the 2 level, and even if it is, 3♣ might not show the hand you think, at least 4♣ is a concrete slamgoing "real fit" agreement rather than an invite or xxx/Hx suggestion to play in clubs.

We would open 1♠ on this one, but opening 1♣ has huge advantages on some stronger types. Compare 1♣-1♥-1♠-1N-2♠ (5+♣/5♠ nice hand) to (playing natural methods) 1♠-1N-3♣ and see how much info you've exchanged at the lower level

[Codo]

Raff90, on 2012-December-30, 14:29, said:

First:@Jillybean: Just because he is the creator of that TM means that im not allowed to judge his bidding?
It could have been Versace-Lauria and still would want to discuss it.
And kibitzers are there for discussion. It's not like i said that he is a bad player or anything. I just think it wasn't right there.
And if im wrong and kibitzers are only there for a teaparty and having nice conversations about politics etc then call the TM NAME after it.

@Codo: This has nothing to do with style. They played natural system. You're not judging it right.
If the hand would have been different and they would have played the 7♣ down one and 7♠ which is cold you sure would have critizied the bidding.

@Philking: Ofc you saved lots of room in the bidding. But if partner doesnt have GF or just a barely GF often might not find the right contract to play, because even if their agreement is to show 5/5 that way how do they show 5/6 then?
The cuebids i can understand that he could judge it that the ♥ cue is better. But that auction he kinda doesnt know lots about partner hand and i think shouldnt skip a cuebid.
I hope you still dont regret your post...

I think you are allowed to critze the bidding if you understood it. But you did not understand it.

So it has nothing to do with style. You know that opening 1 ♠ with 5/5 blacks is better, because? You know that showing the singleton diamond is mandatory, because...? Sorry, but you really do not know a lot about different bidding styles. For the 4 ♥ cuebid you may have at least four different explanations:
1. The guy is too bad in general or just forget to cuebid his shortness.
2. 4 heart was pattering out and shows a 5215 hand.
3. 4 heart does not deny a diamond cue but shows the really valuable heart cue first.
4. 4 heart was the answer to minorwood (allby the later bidding excludes this possibility)

Of course you know, that it must be number one, because your teacher/a pro/ whoever had told you, that 4 hearts denies a diamond control. And if this is true for you, it must be true for everybody. So, it must be the first alternative. Dream on.

And the problem with opening 1 ♣ with these hands has nothing to do with some problems with 6/5.

[PhilKing]

Codo, on 2012-December-30, 18:29, said:

And the problem with opening 1 ♣ with these hands has nothing to do with some problems with 6/5.

Exactly. It doesn't even make my top three!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Raff90, on 2012-December-29, 16:09, said:

This just happened at Cayne vs BBO Forums:

You've got:
♠Qxxxx
♥Kx
♦T
♣AKxxx

Partner:
♠A
♥AQJTx
♦Axx
♣QJTx

Perhaps the bidding was based on opening 1C with a minimum 5-5 in the blacks:

1C - 1H
1S - 2D! ( 4th suit GF )
??
.. 2S = minimum 5-5 or
.. 3S = 5s/6c ... a hand worthy of a reverse

After:
2S - 3C
3D ( A, K, or shortness ) - 4C! ( Minorwood )
4S ( 2 - ♣Q ) - 5D ( kickback for Kings )
5H ( ♥K ) - 7C ( can count to 13 whether 3D-cue was K or shortness )

[gnasher]

mgoetze, on 2012-December-30, 17:12, said:

Just so everyone can follow along, our auction was 1♠-2♥-2♠-2NT-3♣-4♣-4♦-4NT-5♥-7♣


Only if you think 4♣ absolutely forced me to cuebid. I would not have liked your hypothetical hand half as much as my actual hand and might well just have bid 5♣ instead of 4♦ with it. But it's hard to say in retrospect, certainly 5♣ could also be wrong.

I think 4♣ forces you to cue-bid unless your hand is horrible. WIth KQxxx xx x AKxxx you should certainly bid 4♦ - 6♣ slam could be cold opposite a 14-count, and you're much better than you might be. You have prime, concentrated values and a fifth club. Your bidding so far was consistent with KJxxx x Qx A10xxx or KQxxx xx xx AKxx, wasn't it?

[bigbenvic]

I don't understand your post. Unless you explain their system and the nuances that exist, by agreement, then you cannot know if they are wrong in bidding this way.

I wouldn't open a weak hand 1♣ but might do if I was Stronger, especially if the ♠ was Qxxxx but it all comes down to agreements though.

As to the cueing of 4♥ over 4♣ what did the jump to 4c imply since 3♣ was available? Could it have shown a good 1 loser ♥ suit and a ♣ slam force, whereas 3♣ might have been just a ♣ force, maybe a balanced strong hand with 4 ♣? In which case the most important thing is to show the honour in ♥ as it is the KEY card.

Ask questions (the best way to learn IMO) but try not to be accusational as you can upset the people who can improve you and they won't want to help.

[Fluffy]

I am probably biased because my clients always bid 5m over my 4m slam tries and I hate it so much, but I would go as far as to forbid 5m over 4m. So often all I want to do is use RKCW and I cannot.