[32519]

A hand from our local club last night. Partner and I play "Short ♣" which uses some ideas from the Polish ♣ system.
The actual bidding is included:

---

Partner was sitting South and simply blasted into the ♣ slam which made. My question is this: How do you explore for the ♣ slam legitimately given the opposition competing in ♥?

[mike777]

btw some reason south does not open 1s?

[SteveMoe]

Perhaps something like this:
1♣ - 1♥ - 3♣ - 3♥
3♠ - P - 4♦ - P
4♥ - P - 4♠ - P
6♣

-or- if West is inspired to rebid 4♥:
1♣ - 1♥ - 3♣ - 3♥
3♠ - 4♥ - 4N(2ndary ♦) - P
5♥ - P - 6♣

[32519]

mike777, on 2013-February-20, 00:32, said:

btw some reason south does not open 1s?

1♠/1♥/1♦ all show a 5-card suit and 12-17 HCP. 1♣ can be short 12-17 HCP (either balanced/semi balanced/unbalanced) or 18-21 HCP any distribution.

[Cyberyeti]

I'm not sure W would overcall 2♥ over 1♠ so:

1♠-1N(not playing 2/1)
3♣-4♣(better than 5♣)
4♥-4N(♦ cue)
5♦-5♠(stiff as bypassed last time)
5N(anything else)-6♣(no)

Otherwise we split our distributional minor raises between 2N and 3♣ so opener knows that responder is 5-8

1♣-(1♥)-2N-(3♥)
3♠-3N(♦ cue)
4♦(KC)-4♥(0)
4♠(Q♣?)-5♦(yes + K♦)
5♥-6♣

[Antrax]

Not sure how partner can bid 3♣ here when you could be a 7=2=4=0 21-count.

[han]

Antrax, on 2013-February-20, 02:14, said:

Not sure how partner can bid 3♣ here when you could be a 7=2=4=0 21-count.

Get your hand to the bidding box. Withdraw all cards up to and including 3C. Place them on the tray. Really not so difficult.

Partner is not forced to pass when holding a 7-2-4-0 21-count.

[Cyberyeti]

Antrax, on 2013-February-20, 02:14, said:

Not sure how partner can bid 3♣ here when you could be a 7=2=4=0 21-count.

Why not ? it's the equivalent of 1♣(strong)-2M(weak 2 type hand) as played in a few systems.

[Antrax]

I've been playing my inverted raises wrong, I guess. I thought the rationale for jumping is the law and all that. No point in hijacking, though. Thanks.

[gwnn]

Antrax, on 2013-February-20, 02:51, said:

I've been playing my inverted raises wrong, I guess. I thought the rationale for jumping is the law and all that. No point in hijacking, though. Thanks.

No worries about hijacking. The rationale is the law if partner is weak. If partner is strong (unlikely but possible as in this case), he can bid again and we're still not usually unmanageably high. Plus, maybe he has a strong balanced hand, in which case him knowing that we have something like 4-7 points with 6 clubs is a good description of our hand.

[Zelandakh]

I hate to break it to those who have posted lovely cue auctions but if you are playing the system that opens this hand 1♣ then a 3♠ rebid is natural. It seems to me considerably better for North simply to make the pair's forcing club raise, whether that be 4♣ or whatever else. When North cooperates, South might want to check whether the ♠K is held, since that might make 7 decent. Sadly, there is probably might not enough space to find out everything.

Out of interest, what does "inverted" actually mean in this context? Is gwnn's description correct?

[WGF_Flame]

I don't think the given bid is so bad, not always need to make it scientific.
6C is legitimate enough for me.

[ahydra]

2D (strong, various options) - 2H (semi-positive, at least a good 5 HCP)
2S (spades) - 2NT (denies 8 HCP)
3C (nat second suit) - 4C (nat)

At this point North has shown roughly a 6-count with club support but no spade support. Chances are his hand is better for clubs as well otherwise he'd have tried 3NT. So I think South can judge slam is there but grand is unlikely, and just bid 6C.

On the actual auction I don't see much wrong with blasting to 6C either to be honest. Opposite a pre-emptive raise, grand is unlikely.

ahydra

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2013-February-20, 00:03, said:

A hand from our local club last night. Partner and I play "Short ♣" which uses some ideas from the Polish ♣ system.
The actual bidding is included:

---

Partner was sitting South and simply blasted into the ♣ slam which made. My question is this: How do you explore for the ♣ slam legitimately given the opposition competing in ♥?

You (presumably) understand the system that you are playing, so I hesitate to give advice other than suggesting that it is folly to expect others to teach you your own homebrew system.

With this said and done, more standard methods will presumably start with a 1♠ opening and enjoy an obstructed auction

1♠ - 1N
3♣ - 4♣

looks like a reasonable start

[billw55]

hrothgar, on 2013-February-20, 06:14, said:

1♠ - 1N
3♣ - 4♣

looks like a reasonable start

Agree, perhaps this is one hand where strong clubbers are at a disadvantage.

But really, why is the table auction non-legitimate? 9+ fit, all keycards, second round control in ops suit, I might blast also. If you want an alternative, how about just 4♥, partner can 4♠, and bidding 6♣ is easy.

That said, I think the north hand is too good for a weak club raise.

[32519]

How about this as a legitimate sequence to get to the ♣ slam -

---

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2013-February-20, 03:47, said:

I hate to break it to those who have posted lovely cue auctions but if you are playing the system that opens this hand 1♣ then a 3♠ rebid is natural.

Out of interest, what does "inverted" actually mean in this context? Is gwnn's description correct?

Good point.

Inverted is irrelevant in the context of a non natural club, although with this sort of club, it's not silly to assume partner is 12-17 and bid accordingly, then adjust with the big hands.

I think N has to give up on science here and bid 4♥ over 3♥ to show a force with support. If my partner bid 4♠ over this I'd be worried with the S hand that he had Kx, xxx, xx, QJxxxx and the grand was rigid. Would depend on the envelope that 3♣ put me in how I would respond to 4♥.