[jahol]

One board from yesterday:

Partner..A85--AJ109--1032--AKQ
Me.........KQJ107432--2--Q--xxx

Bidding (partner was the dealer):
1 club---pass---1 spade---2 dia
double--pass---4 spades--pass....

The double was support - exactly 3 cards in spades, no info about HCPs (particularly...no extra HCP values).

The discussion:
Me: You have too many HCPs to pass my 4S bid. I bid 4S taking into account a possibility of only 12 HCPs in your hand.
Partner: You have too big distribution to jump to 4S, you could have bid 3dia first.
Me: You are right, but still you should not have passed 4S bid. By the way, it seems to me that 3dia-4spades sequence should represent a bit different type of hand.

Who should be blamed for missing cold slam, in your opinion? Me, partner or both of us?

Jahol

[EricK]

I think the strong hand should raise 4♠ to 5♠ to ask if partner has a ♦ control and take the small risk of there being 3 ♦ losers.

But I don't much like the 1♠ bid on your hand (although it can hardly be blamed for your missing the slam, it would have made it too easy for the opps to come in on a lot of other hands). It looks more like a 4♠ response to me: 1♣ 4♠ 5♣ 5♦ 6♠ is about right.

That being said, you could have made a splinter bid on the second round of 4♦. This immediately agrees ♠, whereas a 3♦ bid might be a probe for more information on a hand with only 4♠.

On another point, what would a bid of 3♦ instead of the support double show? If you are not using it for something better, you could use it for GF hands with 3 card support (using the support double only as a competitive tool). Then you could get a controlled auction like 1♣ 1♠ (2♦) 3♦ 3♥ (cue) 4♣ (cue) 4♦ (cue) 4NT etc

Eric

[nikos59]

Since you did not bid 4S at your first round (I would not)
what is the use of jumping now? If you want to
jump, jump to 6S (I probably would). Else, go slow.

That said, pard could also make a move over 4S to
ask for a diamond control. Note however that with
Kxx opposite 10xx the slam is at risk of a diamond
ruff.

All in all, I would judge responder 85% guilty.

[Fluffy]

I thin the 1♠+4♠ are correct, its true other options may be better, but that isn´t very clear, and all in all the bids are correct.

Its the strong hand who underbid, as Erick Says he should bid 5♠ to ask for control in their suit.

[whereagles]

Usually, a 1x-4S bid shows something like

QJTxxxxx
x
xx
xx

i.e. very weak hand with long suit. Weaker than the corresponding preempt, mind you. The point is that if you're going to preempt pard, you should be reasonably sure 4 is the limit. With

KQJxxxxx
x
Q
Txx

there is still some chance 6S would make if opener has a max (as he had), so it is perhaps better to bid 1S and follow up with 4S. Of course, this hand is very much borderline, and bidding 1 or 4 will depend more on how things are going than technical merits. In precision you could bid a direct 4, since opener will never have the magic hand.

[inquiry]

I am going to disagree with the panel, and divide the blame about evenly. The mistake your made was your 4♠. The original plan, no doubt was 1♠ followed by 4♠. I agree with that. The auction has taken a new turn with the 2♦ bid and the double. Now I would make a self-splinter of 4♦.... this assumes partner knows this is a self-splinter showing awesome spade suit, control of diamonds. Your partner on the other hand is too good to pass a leap to 4♠, and a 5♠ bid looking for a diamond control is still a good idea...but he might be concerned by your decision no to make a self splinter.

Ben

[jahol]

Well, I agree the most with this contribution. My failure that autosplinter did not come to my mind and it is true that partner might not expect a hand like this. Still, he could make a try, but dividing the blame evenly seems to be fair.

[Free]

First of all: what does 1♣-2♠ mean in your partnership? If it's GF, then I think the 1♠ bid is wrong to start with.

Next, 4♠ is to play, because of distribution. You have 2 suits where you have stiff, and you have 10 trumps together. 4♠ doesn't describe your hand the way it should.

Passing 4♠ is clear imo, since you have 3 small ♦s, which might be easy source of losing tricks! You might get too high by continue bidding...

[junyi_zhu]

jahol, on Dec 14 2004, 08:16 AM, said:

One board from yesterday:

Partner..A85--AJ109--1032--AKQ
Me.........KQJ107432--2--Q--xxx

Bidding (partner was the dealer):
1 club---pass---1 spade---2 dia
double--pass---4 spades--pass....

The double was support - exactly 3 cards in spades, no info about HCPs (particularly...no extra HCP values).

The discussion:
Me: You have too many HCPs to pass my 4S bid. I bid 4S taking into account a possibility of only 12 HCPs in your hand.
Partner: You have too big distribution to jump to 4S, you could have bid 3dia first.
Me: You are right, but still you should not have passed 4S bid. By the way, it seems to me that 3dia-4spades sequence should represent a bit different type of hand.

Who should be blamed for missing cold slam, in your opinion? Me, partner or both of us?

Jahol

south has a 6 loser hand, partner shows 3 card support so he should bid more especially when he has a conservative partner who doesn't bid with 18 over his 4S. And the bidding is very easy actually:
4D. Actually north's conservative pass can work out handsomely, if partner happened to hold SKQJxxx hKxx DQxx Cx so I don't really think it's wrong, it's just conservative.

[pclayton]

Yes I like the autosplinter too. Great bid that simplifies things for pard.

[HeartA]

Auto-splinter is the key.

[Fluffy]

Autosplinter is simply insane (Imo, maybe its me who is crazy).

What has changed from your previous intention form bidding 4♠ previous round?

You hold 6 playing HCP, not 12, splinter is made for partner to reevaluate his Qs and Ks outside ♦, wich we DON´T want to happen, 4♠ doesn´t describe much the hand, but at least it doesn´t missdescribe it.

[han]

I'm with "me"

[pclayton]

Fluffy, on Dec 14 2004, 03:41 PM, said:

Autosplinter is simply insane (Imo, maybe its me who is crazy).

What has changed from your previous intention form bidding 4♠ previous round?

You hold 6 playing HCP, not 12, splinter is made for partner to reevaluate his Qs and Ks outside ♦, wich we DON´T want to happen, 4♠ doesn´t describe much the hand, but at least it doesn´t missdescribe it.

K & R calls this hand 11.9. As long as you've decided the hand is too strong for a direct 4♠ ( I agree), it can't hurt to splinter on the way.

[junyi_zhu]

Fluffy, on Dec 14 2004, 11:41 PM, said:

Autosplinter is simply insane (Imo, maybe its me who is crazy).

What has changed from your previous intention form bidding 4♠ previous round?

You hold 6 playing HCP, not 12, splinter is made for partner to reevaluate his Qs and Ks outside ♦, wich we DON´T want to happen, 4♠ doesn´t describe much the hand, but at least it doesn´t missdescribe it.

I somehow agree, it's light, but if you don't bid it, you'd never be able to show it. This hand isn't quite slamish, it makes a slam only facing a very strong hand. Still, you gotta have a way to show your shortness below the game, otherwise, it's extremely hard for partner to continue. Actually, I don't really like support double here, if the rebid is 2NT, now you really have a clear picture of partner's hand. I feel, for strong balanced hands, it's still better to bid 2NT first than support double, because support double only bids 3 cards of your hand, 2NT shows the overall value and shape. Also, you may call it crazy because you don't really hold a stopper to bid 2NT:).

[EricK]

A lot of people are saying the hand is too strong, or otherwise wrong, for an immediate 4♠ bid. Personally I think a 1♠ bid has almost no upside and many downsides :-

1) This hand is never going to stop short of game
2) If you bid 1♠ and opponents rapidly bid to a high level you will never know what to do, nor will your partner. Bidding 4♠ allows you to trust partner's subsequent decisions.
3) Even if the opponents don't intervene you will never be able to describe this hand to partner except by blasting to 4♠ at some point. Nor are you likely to be able to get the relevant information from partner to enable you to be confident about slam.
4) Bidding an immediate 4♠ only loses if slam makes AND partner is not able to probe for slam having heard your bid. Bidding 4♠ immediately might gain if partner is able to make a probe for slam because he knows about your long strong ♠ (eg if he has singleton ♠)

Bearing all this in mind, I think 4♠ is the correct first round bid from both a constructive and competitive point of view.

Eric

[junyi_zhu]

EricK, on Dec 15 2004, 07:56 PM, said:

A lot of people are saying the hand is too strong, or otherwise wrong, for an immediate 4♠ bid. Personally I think a 1♠ bid has almost no upside and many downsides :-

1) This hand is never going to stop short of game
2) If you bid 1♠ and opponents rapidly bid to a high level you will never know what to do, nor will your partner. Bidding 4♠ allows you to trust partner's subsequent decisions.
3) Even if the opponents don't intervene you will never be able to describe this hand to partner except by blasting to 4♠ at some point. Nor are you likely to be able to get the relevant information from partner to enable you to be confident about slam.
4) Bidding an immediate 4♠ only loses if slam makes AND partner is not able to probe for slam having heard your bid. Bidding 4♠ immediately might gain if partner is able to make a probe for slam because he knows about your long strong ♠ (eg if he has singleton ♠)

Bearing all this in mind, I think 4♠ is the correct first round bid from both a constructive and competitive point of view.

Eric

This is a false claim. Without overcall, it would go like this:
1C 1S
2N 3S(forcing)
4C(cue) 4D
bla bla.

This is an easy slam and nobody would miss it playing some basic stuff.

A direct 4S is OK only when you have the agreement that you don't have 3 potential losers in side suits. And still, you don't really have 5 level safety
facing such a good partner: SAxx HAKx DAKx CJxxx, you can say you don't bid over 4S with this hand, but then facing SKQJxxxxx Hxx Dxx Cx, 6S is cold and 5S is high facing the actual hand. So 1S is actually OK because it really produce a slam facing a proper 2NT rebid hands.

[EricK]

But how often does opener have a 2NT opening? And even then how many of those have three losers in a side suit?

I think that catering for that sort of special hand is a losing proposition on all the other hands.

Eric

[EricK]

I have just used Jack 2.04 to deal out 10 hands where dealer has a 1♣ opening, next hand passes and you have the long spade hand (none vulnerable).

The results are as follows:

1) 4♠ makes exactly; 5♦ is down 2
2) 4♠ makes exactly; 5♦/5♥ are down 1
3) 5♠ makes; 6♥ is down 1
4) 4♠ makes plus 1, opponents can only make 3♦
5) 4♠ makes exactly; 5♥ is down 1
6) 5♠ makes; 6♦/6♥ are down 2
7) 4♠ makes plus one; 9 tricks for opposition
8) 5♠ makes; 6♦/6♥ are down 1
9) 5♠ makes; 6♥ is down 2
10) 4♠ is down 1; 4♥ makes exactly

Not a large sample, I know, but the results seem pretty clear to me.

Eric

[junyi_zhu]

EricK, on Dec 15 2004, 08:58 PM, said:

But how often does opener have a 2NT opening? And even then how many of those have three losers in a side suit?

I think that catering for that sort of special hand is a losing proposition on all the other hands.

Eric

Sigh, why are you guys are stubborn like this? I am not saying 4S is always a poor bid or good bid. All I want to point out is that your claim is no true if there is no overcall. a slam can be easily bid without much complicate stuff. That's why I called it's a false claim. You can do whatever you like in bidding, but I don't really like claims like even without overcalls, there is no way to find a slam and responder should always jump to 4S the next round. It just doesn't make sense to me.