not much investigation possible
#1
Posted 2013-February-17, 15:11
♠-
♥AKQJ104
♦AKQJ5
♣A7
our side is vunerable, partner deals and opens 4♠, RHO passes.
#2
Posted 2013-February-17, 15:40
Oh wait I thought RHO opened 4♠ lol
- billw55
#3
Posted 2013-February-17, 15:42
I'll be content with 6 hearts.
#4
Posted 2013-February-17, 15:48
RKCB is dangerous because there might be some ambiguity about your subsequent bid of 6♥ or 7♥.
To make 13 tricks, partner needs a trick and an entry. The ♠A along with the ♥9 or the ♦10 works (in which case 7NT is the right spot). The ♣K works by itself (in which case 7♥ is the right spot unless partner also has the ♠A, which would make 7NT the right spot).
Unless you play asking bids over 4♠, there is no way you can find out about the ♣K. Of course, it makes perfect sense for a simple new suit bid to be an asking bid, as the chance that you would want to play a different suit at the 5 level after a 4♠ opening is probably less than 0.5%. But since there are other possibilities besides partner having the ♣K that result in making 7♥ or 7NT, asking for the ♣K is not the be-all and the end-all.
If I have the agreement that 5♣ is an asking bid AND that any bid I make at the 6 level or higher thereafter is to play, then 5♣ is the way to go.
Otherwise, a simple 6♥ (assuming that it is to play) will have to do. I am not going to bet the house that partner has either the ♣K or a trick and an entry.
#6
Posted 2013-February-17, 16:29
Cyberyeti, on 2013-February-17, 16:01, said:
Sure, its possible that partner has that. Although if he has AKQxxxxx he needs the opps spades to break 3-2 to make 7♠, while I can make 7♥ or even 7♦ with very normal breaks in those suits as long as I have an entry and a trick or just the ♣K in opener's hand. And there is certainly no guarantee that partner has 7 or 8 solid (or very close to solid) spades. Even 6♠ could fail if partner has a perfectly normal suit like AQJxxxxx or AKTxxxxx for his 4♠ opening if spades break 4-1.
#7
Posted 2013-February-17, 16:52
ArtK78, on 2013-February-17, 16:29, said:
I have an ask that can establish this over 4m but not over 4M - there is room in our structure for a bid which says "I have the nuts outside but no more than a small singleton in your suit" and a potential reask for stiff/void. If you're really unlucky he'll have KQJ1098xxx, void, xx, xx and you'll have a diamond loser in 6♥/N but no trouble in 6♠.
Funnily enough, we had a hand which could be better in 6♠ come up today in a match I was playing in.
AQJ1098xx, void, xx, Qxx
#8
Posted 2013-February-17, 16:57
Shame on all the 6♥ bidders!
Lord Molyb, on 2013-February-17, 15:42, said:
I'll be content with 6 hearts.
I used to play 5♦ asked for a heart control. That works a treat here - when partner bids 5♥ or 6♠, you can bid the obvious 7♦, settling for 7♥ when partner signs off.
Cyberyeti, on 2013-February-17, 16:52, said:
Funnily enough, we had a hand which could be better in 6♠ come up today in a match I was playing in.
AQJ1098xx, void, xx, Qxx
Anyone for diamonds?
#11
Posted 2013-February-17, 17:57
If you bid 7 and it makes vs. the opponents being in 6, you'll gain 13 IMPs. If you bid 7 and it goes down vs. the opponents being in 6, you're losing 17 IMPs. The break even point is about a 56% chance that 7 makes. So you want to be pretty sure 7 makes if you bid it.
For 7 to make, you need a way to get rid of your ♣ loser AND bring in your ♦ suit without a loser. That seems like a pretty tall order to me.
I bid 6 ♥ feeling that is much more likely to make than 7 ♥.
#13
Posted 2013-February-17, 19:18
#14
Posted 2013-February-17, 22:07
PhilKing, on 2013-February-17, 19:18, said:
Should show what? A hand where you have a chance to make 13 tricks if partner's 4♠ opening can produce a 13th trick opposite a red two-suiter?
#16
Posted 2013-February-18, 07:16
ArtK78, on 2013-February-17, 22:07, said:
More than a chance.
Dummy's clubs get discarded on his red shortage, and you ruff the club. If partner is 8122 or 8212, only a 5-1 or 6-1 break beats you. Two out of three 7321s are OK and even 7123 has play on shape alone, and partner is allowed to have a high card.
#17
Posted 2013-February-18, 09:47
#18
Posted 2013-February-18, 15:45
PhilKing, on 2013-February-17, 19:18, said:
The problem with this approach is that it removes the ability to make an asking bid in one off suit and then sign off in 6 or 7 of another off suit.
For example, suppose responder held:
---
Ax
AKQJxxxxx
AK
Wouldn't you like to ask about second round heart control before signing off in 6♦ or 7♦? This is probably a more likely occurance than asking partner to choose between two suits at the 7 level after he opens 4 of a suit.
After this thread was posted, I discussed the situation with my regular partner. We agreed that a simple new suit bid by responder is an asking bid, and that any subsequent bid at the 6 or 7 level is to play.
#19
Posted 2013-February-18, 16:03
ArtK78, on 2013-February-18, 15:45, said:
Wouldn't you like to ask about second round heart control before signing off in 6♦ or 7♦? This is probably a more likely occurance than asking partner to choose between two suits at the 7 level after he opens 4 of a suit.
Yes, sure, but given that I no longer play asking bids, unlikely or not, logic dictates that 5♥ followed by 7♦ should show, of all things, hearts and diamonds. If I played asking bids here, I would still bid 5♥, and then bid 7♦ to play if partner shows a heart control and 7♥ otherwise, which is a huge favourite opposite 2+ hearts. So on the actual hand, it is trivial to get to the right grand using cues or asks.
I no longer have a clear solution to your ♥Ax hand, but then again, no one solved the first hand correctly even when they had the tools to do so. I would try 5♦ cue and hopefully get a 5♥ cue in response. I need partner to realise that my first bid is a cue OR natural and forcing to avoid strain issues.
#20
Posted 2013-February-19, 02:10

Help
