[eagles123]

South deals no interference we are non vul vs vul


JT76
AKJ
AQJT52
-

AK53
8
K4
AKQT52


how do people bid this

thanks

Eagles

[ArtK78]

I suspect there are many ways to bid these cards, most likely ending up in 6♠ or 6NT. Kudos to any pair that can find a way to get to 7NT or 7♦.

The main problem on this hand is that once the 4-4 spade fit is located the partnership will find out that the ♠Q is missing and will settle for the small slam. It is hard to determine that there are 13 tricks there for the taking in NT (or diamonds).

[wank]

shouldn't be that tricky. once south forces to game, north knows its going to be played at the 7 level 99% of the time.

1c-1d-2s-3s-4c-4nt-5x-5q-5s-5nt-6d-7d-7nt.

5x = aces, 5q = trump q ask, 5s = no

[MrAce]

wank, on 2014-June-20, 10:38, said:

shouldn't be that tricky. once south forces to game, north knows its going to be played at the 7 level 99% of the time.

1c-1d-2s-3s-4c-4nt-5x-5q-5s-5nt-6d-7d-7nt.

5x = aces, 5q = trump q ask, 5s = no

I like it, you have a good shot at bidding 7 with confidence when pd responds 3 keys and no Q. But that 4 NT may not be as useful as it is if pd responds 2+Q.

4 NT-5♠ - ? 5spade=2+Q

Which hand does he hold?

AKQx x Kx KQJxxx

KQxx x Kx AKQJxx

Nevermind if you cue only aces after 3♠.

[Cyberyeti]

We might well decide to SJS with the N hand treating it as one suited with the diamonds that good and the spades that bad, in which case we bid:

1♣-2♦(one suited rock crusher or fit jump)
2♠-2N(one suited type)
3♣-3♥
3♠-4♦
4♥(KC)-4♠(0/3)
4N(Q?)-5♥(yes + K♥)
7N

Well you have AK♥ and AQJ to 6 or more diamonds to bid like this so 6+2+3+2 = 13

If we respond 1♦ I suspect we only reach 6 due to premature spade agreement.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-June-20, 16:31, said:

We might well decide to SJS with the N hand treating it as one suited with the diamonds that good and the spades that bad, in which case we bid:

1♣-2♦(one suited rock crusher or fit jump)
2♠-2N(one suited type)
3♣-3♥
3♠-4♦
4♥(KC)-4♠(0/3)
4N(Q?)-5♥(yes + K♥)
7N

Well you have AK♥ and AQJ to 6 or more diamonds to bid like this so 6+2+3+2 = 13

If we respond 1♦ I suspect we only reach 6 due to premature spade agreement.

Yea but the problem with this approach and your approach in general to problems that people have been complaining in the past, is that you create judgement/auctions per result.

1-You do not have one suited hand
2-It is not even close to be a rock crusher, unless you have some coughing methods to spot Kx ♦ that pd holds before you decide to claim that AQJTxx is a "rock crusher"

While you are well prepared early with your "rock crusher one suited" hand for the grandslam, unfortunately you do not know yet whether your side has a slam or not. No need to mention only possible game can easily be 4♠ which is thrown out the window at your first bid most of the time. God forbid if pd holds 5-5 or 5-6 blacks, is he supposed to get out of relay and try to find a fit in black suits by ignoring your "Rock Crusher" suit? Or does he always know "Rock Crusher" is only rock crusher when he holds Kx in that suit?

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2014-June-20, 16:54, said:

Yea but the problem with this approach and your approach in general to problems that people have been complaining in the past, is that you create judgement/auctions per result.

1-You do not have one suited hand
2-It is not even close to be a rock crusher, unless you have some coughing methods to spot Kx ♦ that pd holds before you decide to claim that AQJTxx is a "rock crusher"

While you are well prepared early with your "rock crusher one suited" hand for the grandslam, unfortunately you do not know yet whether your side has a slam or not. No need to mention only possible game can easily be 4♠ which is thrown out the window at your first bid most of the time. God forbid if pd holds 5-5 or 5-6 blacks, is he supposed to get out of relay and try to find a fit in black suits by ignoring your "Rock Crusher" suit? Or does he always know "Rock Crusher" is only rock crusher when he holds Kx in that suit?

OK, do I have to spell everything out, the hand I'm bidding is something like J10x, AKJ, AQJ10xx, x which for us counts as a one suited rock crusher, basically my suit is playable opposite a small singleton in a slam which is what I show and I have 7.5 playing tricks which is about enough. For 4♠ to be the only game is very unlikely but just about possible, usually it will play for at least 9 tricks in NT (our opening club is a real suit and can't be a weak NT). We obey a "don't bid bad suits with good hands" philosophy which is why we might well treat this as one suited. I should have added to the 2N bid that it also shows I probably am looking for a little help in the diamond suit and am not totally happy opposite a void, 3♦ would totally set diamonds here.

And the 5-5/6 is as mirage, the first opens 1♠ unless he has a couple of big hand types which are bid like the second, the second starts 1♣-2♦-2♠-2N-3♠.

[mike777]

1c=1d
1s!=2s!( playing walsh I could bid a gf 2s here after starting with 1d, with less start with 1s)
3c=3d
4d=4h
4nt=5h
?

north knows south has 5+c and 4s and KD from the 4d cuebid
south knows north has 5+d and 4s, gf, 2 aces and denies Qs.
a minimum type hand for north would be:

Jxxx..AQx...AQJxx...x
But North may have far more or other types of minimum hands.

In any case I could see shooting out 7d and if north does not have great d we are in trouble.
---

n

[chasetb]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-June-20, 16:31, said:

We might well decide to SJS with the N hand treating it as one suited with the diamonds that good and the spades that bad, in which case we bid:1♣-2♦(one suited rock crusher or fit jump)2♠-2N(one suited type)3♣-3♥3♠-4♦4♥(KC)-4♠(0/3)4N(Q?)-5♥(yes + K♥)7NWell you have AK♥ and AQJ to 6 or more diamonds to bid like this so 6+2+3+2 = 13If we respond 1♦ I suspect we only reach 6 due to premature spade agreement.

MrAce, on 2014-June-20, 16:54, said:

Yea but the problem with this approach and your approach in general to problems that people have been complaining in the past, is that you create judgement/auctions per result.1-You do not have one suited hand 2-It is not even close to be a rock crusher, unless you have some coughing methods to spot Kx ♦ that pd holds before you decide to claim that AQJTxx is a "rock crusher"While you are well prepared early with your "rock crusher one suited" hand for the grandslam, unfortunately you do not know yet whether your side has a slam or not. No need to mention only possible game can easily be 4♠ which is thrown out the window at your first bid most of the time. God forbid if pd holds 5-5 or 5-6 blacks, is he supposed to get out of relay and try to find a fit in black suits by ignoring your "Rock Crusher" suit? Or does he always know "Rock Crusher" is only rock crusher when he holds Kx in that suit?

MrAce, I have to disagree with you here. While technically you are 6-4, it's such an imbalance (and if you changed 2 Diamonds to 2 Clubs, 4-card Major players would still open 1♦) that I would treat it as a 1-suiter if I had that bid. Also, there is nothing wrong with the bid, if you cheat a tad and call it 17+ HCP. Read THIS article by Karen Walker for a great write-up if you do play SJS.

My auction would start 1♣ - 2♦ ; 2♠ (shows values, not necessarily length) - 3♦ (17+) and go from there.

[MrAce]

chasetb, on 2014-June-21, 00:12, said:

MrAce, I have to disagree with you here. While technically you are 6-4, it's such an imbalance (and if you changed 2 Diamonds to 2 Clubs, 4-card Major players would still open 1♦) that I would treat it as a 1-suiter if I had that bid. Also, there is nothing wrong with the bid, if you cheat a tad and call it 17+ HCP. Read THIS article by Karen Walker for a great write-up if you do play SJS.

My auction would start 1♣ - 2♦ ; 2♠ (shows values, not necessarily length) - 3♦ (17+) and go from there.

Of course you are entitled to disagree, I have no problem with that. I also don't have problem stretching 1 hcp. My problem is that those stretches do not end there in order to make a shirt to fit that body. You guys also stretch the shape! Both Cyber and you conveniently skipping the meaning of bids in between. Write them clearly and what they meant, i will just simply put another hand that opens 1♣ which will fit exactly to the meaning of bids you claim and believe me I can play this game of changing hands all day long.

You say 1♣-2♦-2♠ showing values and does not promise length. Fine. Does that bid promise Kx support to pd's "Rock Crusher" suit or can opener be void or single in this suit? How will you continue over 3♦ 17+? Easier said than done. Oh my, actually this is getting extremely interesting...You guys may even end up in non making 6♦ while 7♠ is cold!


Did you notice that this is MP and finding a spade fit, if there is any, can be vital if there is no slam or grandslam? Because when you guys start 2♦ you have no idea yet the opener has a power house!

Quote

Unless stated, hands I post will be MP and bid with Acol

Now I can't help him with the Acol part and you all can disregard my replies if Acol means SJS responses. But at MP I do not think ignoring spade fit is a good idea.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2014-June-21, 04:20, said:

Now I can't help him with the Acol part and you all can disregard my replies if Acol means SJS responses. But at MP I do not think ignoring spade fit is a good idea.

Old fashioned Acol has SJSs but they're always the "long strong suit" type rather than fit and 16+ ish. Many people don't play those any more, with a variety of things being played.

I was looking at hands like AKxx, Qxx, x, AKxxx or A9xx, Qxx, K, AKxxx opposite where 6♦ and 6N are cold (barring diamonds 5-1 in the first case), but 6♠ is not although it will make most of the time.

I missed originally that the hand was MPs, not sure that it would change my approach though.

[nekthen]

Surprised there has been no discussion about the opening bid. 3 loser hand. I would be opening 2♣. I know it is awkward when holding ♣ as main suit but huge risk that p passes one club.
So
2♣ 3♦
4N 5S two A + Q♦
5N 6♦ (no ♣ King)
6N 7N

Once opener goes on to 6N responder must bid 7 with the ♥ King as an extra trick

[Cyberyeti]

nekthen, on 2014-June-21, 10:29, said:

Surprised there has been no discussion about the opening bid. 3 loser hand. I would be opening 2♣. I know it is awkward when holding ♣ as main suit but huge risk that p passes one club.
So
2♣ 3♦
4N 5S two A + Q♦
5N 6♦ (no ♣ King)
6N 7N

Once opener goes on to 6N responder must bid 7 with the ♥ King as an extra trick

Blackwood is a joke over 3♦. Your chance of finding the right spot opposite QJxx, Ax, Axxxxx, x or x, Axx, Axxxxx, Jxx, or does partner always have AQJxx or AQxxxx ? xxxx, Axx, AQxxx, x is not good either in 6N.

The raise to 7N is also terrible, partner might have a club holding headed by AQJ where he needed specifically K♣ for the grand, say AK, Q, Kxx, AQJ10xxx.

[nekthen]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-June-21, 11:55, said:

Blackwood is a joke over 3♦. Your chance of finding the right spot opposite QJxx, Ax, Axxxxx, x or x, Axx, Axxxxx, Jxx, or does partner always have AQJxx or AQxxxx ? xxxx, Axx, AQxxx, x is not good either in 6N.

The raise to 7N is also terrible, partner might have a club holding headed by AQJ where he needed specifically K♣ for the grand, say AK, Q, Kxx, AQJ10xxx.

1. In Acol imo AQxxxx is the absolute minimum for a jump to 3♦. So no it is not a joke. Please do not try insulting other contributors!
2. I explained that by bidding 6♦ the K♣ has been denied. Yet partner can see 12 tricks in NT opposite AQxxxx ♦ plus an A. We also know that all the key cards are owned so the K♥ must be 13th trick

[mike777]

Agree that after a strong 2c opener, responder will never stop short of the grand. Agree we have a 3 loser hand. Still I think opening 2c is a bit much in a 2/1 context. I am less worried about 1c being passed out or missing game if pard starts with 1d playing walsh style. If they respond 1h over 1c I may rebid 2s to force. Granted many play 1h could be close to zero pts at fav vul.


xxx...xxxxx....xxxxx...void or a bit more

[Cyberyeti]

nekthen, on 2014-June-21, 13:23, said:

1. In Acol imo AQxxxx is the absolute minimum for a jump to 3♦. So no it is not a joke. Please do not try insulting other contributors!
2. I explained that by bidding 6♦ the K♣ has been denied. Yet partner can see 12 tricks in NT opposite AQxxxx ♦ plus an A. We also know that all the key cards are owned so the K♥ must be 13th trick

3♦ is not a "jump response" in the normal sense, 2♦ is negative, 3♦ is a simple positive diamond response in old fashioned Acol and has no such restrictions, although some people impose them, what do you respond to 2♣ with xxxx, AQx, AJ10xx, x for example ?

Yes it makes a lot more sense if you are guaranteeing AQxxxx, but in old fashioned Acol you're not.

[nekthen]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-June-21, 14:31, said:

3♦ is not a "jump response" in the normal sense, 2♦ is negative, 3♦ is a simple positive diamond response in old fashioned Acol and has no such restrictions, although some people impose them, what do you respond to 2♣ with xxxx, AQx, AJ10xx, x for example ?

Yes it makes a lot more sense if you are guaranteeing AQxxxx, but in old fashioned Acol you're not.

In old school Acol where 2♦ is only negative I concur, but modern style is to use 2♦ as a waiting bid if no other bid is accurate. So 3 of any suit is a good suit. A minimum of AQxxxx otherwise let p show his hand first.

[Cyberyeti]

nekthen, on 2014-June-22, 03:53, said:

In old school Acol where 2♦ is only negative I concur, but modern style is to use 2♦ as a waiting bid if no other bid is accurate. So 3 of any suit is a good suit. A minimum of AQxxxx otherwise let p show his hand first.

I agree, but an awful lot of people still play the old style (100% of them where I am including the few good players), I don't know what the OP plays which is really what matters here.