[jillybean]

---

2♦ is artificial, game forcing.

Do you agree with the bidding, what now?

[trevahound]

4♦. I'm worth one slam try. I'll respect partner's 4nt or 5♦ sign off, but I'm hoping one twitch was all partner was waiting on, and I certainly have that.

[mike777]

agree with bidding.

I will try pass at Mp. minor suit slams are tough to bid at Mp.

we now have 2 ways to win....3nt and in the play.

[BillHiggin]

I am going to disagree with the bidding so far! Specifically with the 1♠ call. With this shape, finding the possible 4-4 fit will often NOT work well. This hand pattern is called a "swan". It was given that name by Culbertson and he specifically warned against looking for the second suit fit. The problem is that this hand is too likely to become an entry-less pile of diamonds when it gets tapped once in a round suit early.
In spite of the meager point count, it may play quite well in a diamond contract. I prefer a simple 2♦ rebid, reserving enthusiasm until partner indicates reasonable diamond support.

[billw55]

edit: removed nonsense

[ggwhiz]

Why 2♦ artificial game force instead of 2♣?

After the raise to 3♦ you have lost a full level of bidding to investigate a slam or the right game so I'm guessing pass which could well be a disaster opposite short diamonds but I'm out of room.

Bob Hamman: If 3nt is one of the alternatives there are no others.

[aguahombre]

billw55, on 2013-December-20, 07:19, said:

Pass 3NT. Partner's nonforcing 2♦ warns me against slam.

Since Jilly said it was G.F and artificial, why did you decide it wasn't?

I would have preferred to have been given the opportunity to rebid 2D or 3D last round (via 4SGF), but that isn't the method we are given. I think I must pass 3NT, having not had the opportunity to show my degree of playing strength for Diamonds earlier and not knowing whether Partner was merely interested in Heart support.

[billw55]

aguahombre, on 2013-December-20, 09:13, said:

Since Jilly said it was G.F and artificial, why did you decide it wasn't?

Whoops, didn't read the OP properly. My bad.

[kenberg]

4♦ on the logic that not all hands belong in no trump, regardless of the form of scoring. Maybe we end in 6♦. Maybe we end in 5♦ making 6 when there are only nine tricks in NT. Maybe we end in 5♦ making 5 when NT goes down. Maybe a lot of things, bur i am not leaving this in 3NT. I think that the odds are with me, and we will see if the force is.

[MrAce]

kenberg, on 2013-December-20, 10:54, said:

4♦ on the logic that not all hands belong in no trump, regardless of the form of scoring. Maybe we end in 6♦. Maybe we end in 5♦ making 6 when there are only nine tricks in NT. Maybe we end in 5♦ making 5 when NT goes down. Maybe a lot of things, bur i am not leaving this in 3NT. I think that the odds are with me, and we will see if the force is.

I agree with that statement. Leaving to 3 NT can be the winner in practice, but i would also bid 4♦. If pd has diamond support or tolerance we are really close to slam. If he does not, 3 NT ain't gonna be picnic walk with only 1 entry. Having said that, it is still a tuff decision to make, regarding MP.

I also want to know, what would direct 3 NT by pd be over 1♠ ? What did he try to investigate by going thru 2♦ ? Was he seeking 3 card ♥ ? Was opener allowed to raise with 3 card ♥ previously ?

[Winstonm]

I bid on - matchpoints is still bridge.

[ArtK78]

Winstonm, on 2013-December-20, 14:46, said:

I bid on - matchpoints is still bridge.

Since when?

[gszes]

this hand is worth at least 17 toward a slam IF (and that's a big if) p has a dia fit

with us. We have had no opportunity to limit our hand and p 3n could be quite

nice. I would hazard a

4d

slam try here IF p has a 4n sign off available. Bidding is

planning and unless our 1s rebid promised an unbalanced hand (not mentioned)

we have only shown a 4252 hand not a 4171 with top controls to boot. If p does

not fit dia chances of making 3/4n are probably slim but 5d might still be possible.'

The 4d bid should not be confused with a "strong" hand since we failed to rebid 2s

(unless that was systematically impossible) so p should realize we are highly distributional.

Would still bid 1s despite the possible butterfly effect and just hope since we have the king

suit our butterfly is a monarch. (see no sense in not using 2c as GF but who knows what your

partnership uses 2c for:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

[wyman]

4D for me.

[kuhchung]

Hmm, I must be missing something. Why are people so optimistic about this hand? Partner heard that we have a bunch of cards in the pointed suits and chose to bid 3N. If partner had a forward move, he could've bid 4D right? Shouldn't he rate to have a bunch of wastage in our short suits?

[kenberg]

kuhchung, on 2013-December-20, 18:00, said:

Hmm, I must be missing something. Why are people so optimistic about this hand? Partner heard that we have a bunch of cards in the pointed suits and chose to bid 3N. If partner had a forward move, he could've bid 4D right? Shouldn't he rate to have a bunch of wastage in our short suits?

I regard this as possible. I can imagine regretting my 4♦ call. But I think that the odds favor it. Just supposin' for a bit. Suppose pard has the stiff king of diamonds. Maybe that's ok. Or maybe the opening lead is the king of spades. Which is quite possible if pard is sitting with values and length in hearts and clubs. OK, I am not placing a bet on the stiff king in pard's hand. But generally speaking, my experience/gut/ advisory angel says get this hand out of NT. No guarntees but 4♦ for me.

And yes, if partner bids 4NT over 4♦ he will play it there. And if he can only take nine tricks I will do my penance. And then I will bid 4♦ the next time this hand comes up.

[jillybean]

---

we ended in 5♦, (should be in 6) and a bottom board when most other pairs played in 3nt or 4H
It's a pity most club players don't bid like bbf'ers

[kenberg]

Seems to me that with these cards the main thing is to stay out of 7. maybe 4♦-4♥-4♠-5♣-6♦ ?

[jillybean]

kenberg, on 2013-December-20, 21:55, said:

Seems to me that with these cards the main thing is to stay out of 7. maybe 4♦-4♥-4♠-5♣-6♦ ?

yes!
4♥ for us is kickback so...
4D 4H 5D 6D

[kenberg]

Kickback occurred to me but I think this hand is not a great advertisement for the convention. The ♥ 8 could easily be the ♣ 8 on this auction, With cue bids I think the understanding of 4♥-4♠-5♣-6♦ would be "I have first round control of hearts, then spades, then clubs" and then "That's enough to bid 6♦ but not enough to bid 7♦". In the case at hand you can see that you have all but one of the keys but the diamond hand is clearly advertising a lot of shape and could well have a void. What would South's response had been if the ♥8 had been the ♣8?

By the way, does 3NT make ten tricks on a club lead? If clubs are 4-4 it seems that the answer is no (I gather that since you made 6 not 7 in diamonds that there is a diamond to be conceded). And if clubs are 5-3 it makes either ten tricks or eight tricks in NT, depending.

So 6♦ is the right contract, making unless very unlucky.


Also, over the 3♦ call I think that I, as North, would bid 3♥ rather than 3NT. I stop clubs once and my two small diamonds do not assure me that I can run that suit w/o giving up a trick. 4♥ plays pretty well even opposite your small singleton. But 6♦ is the place to be.