[Liversidge]

Wehad this 32 HCP hand last night. We bid 4S and made 12 tricks.We still don't know how to bid it.
I ran it through Jack computer software and Jack just bid game and made the slam.

---

Give South one more point and South (Jack) bid 4NT.

[ahydra]

It's OK, indeed entirely normal, to miss a slam on a finesse for the trump K. On a really bad day you bid 6S, the SK is onside but the hearts split 5-1 and you go down off the top.

Most would likely not bid it either. South could plausibly have a look with 14 HCPs including a lovely HQ opposite a jump rebid (I'd choose 3S myself, not 4S, given it's only 17 HCP with poor shape) - for example, he might continue 4D as he needs a heart control and won't get to hear it after 4C-4D. But then you bid RKC which reveals two missing keycards and you stop.

ahydra

[TylerE]

I mean, it's far from cold.

But after that huge jump to 4♠ S has to find a 2nd bid. Basically the definition of the jump is something like "slam interest opposite opening values".

Having said that, I think 3S is plenty with the N hand.

[johnu]

Would you still like to be in 6♠ if the spade finesse loses?

[smerriman]

johnu, on 2019-January-24, 21:32, said:

Would you still like to be in 6♠ if the spade finesse loses?

Would you still like to avoid 6♠ if the spade finesse works?

That argument is silly; a slam on a finesse is usually worth being in.

But probably not in this case, since it's slightly less than 50%.

[thepossum]

These are more thoughts than advice. Please take advice from those higher up the thread


1H-1S-3S-4S (I think this is most correct)

or

1H-1S-4S-5C-5D-5S-P (not 100% sure of these cues, better at the 4 level, which I think it should be at)

or

1H-1S-4S-4NT-5H-5S-P

or for the high risk takers

1H-1S-4S-6S (once you've jumped to 4 some souths may think its strong enough for this)

Disclaimer - I'm not suggesting the last at all but its the only way I can see to bid it

PS I based earlier auctions partly on LTC and Klinger

[mikeh]

It is less than 50%. It requires the spade finesse, which is precisely 50%, and no heart ruff. Plus 5-0 spades onside could lead to failing. While the major suit split issues are low percentage, they are not zero. Thus the slam is under 50% and yet we have a thread lamenting the inability to reach a bad contract. Why? Because too many players are what we used to call result merchants. They want to bid every making contract.

You will never see such players being consistent winners, because nobody can tell, absent the opps helping, when contracts like this make or fail. Bid slam on these hands 100 times, randomize good the opps’ holdings, and you will be under average at mps and minus imps at imps.

Learn to recognize the correct way to assess contracts, and stop chasing bad contracts that happen to make, and one will improve significantly.

[dsLawsd]

6 NT by North without a club lead might be over 50%. But 4♠ looks like the right spot.
South should bid 4♣ over 3♠ and North would probably try 4 NT which would leave a second chance for heroics after he finds out two key cards are missing. Against a much better team I might try a flyer to 6 since only the A T of hearts are missing.

And, of course, the mavens trying to win an instant tourney always seem to do this to get an excess of imps...grrr.
What fun!

[rmnka447]

Amen to "result merchanting".

Good, even great bidding gets you to reasonable contracts and tends to avoid bad contracts. It's not so completely scientific that you can always get to a place that makes. So sometimes you end up in a good contract and it makes more. Sometimes you end up in a great contract and it goes down. The bidding was right, but the lay of the cards just happened to be favorable or unfavorable.

A couple examples. I got rambunctious on a hand in a KO and bid us up to slam. It only took two finesses onside and a favorable break in a side suit to make, but it did. In the comparison at the end of the set, our partners were thrilled we bid and made the slam. But my partner and I simply said "We didn't bid it well. We definitely overbid and got lucky." Another hand from a KO, my partner opened a weak NT and we got to a slam missing one A that was about an 80-85% chance to make. Unfortunately, opening leader held Axxxx in the suit I held KQJ10x. He played the A and confidently gave his partner a ruff to beat the slam. We felt bad the slam went down, but knew it was right to bid it.

So the questions if a hand makes 6 should be -- Is this a good slam to be in? If so, how can you bid it?

mikeh answered the first question well. No, it isn't.

So, maybe the second question becomes, "How do we stay out of slam?"

After the auction given, the only ways to bid slam is for responder South to blast into it. RKC over 4 ♠ doesn't answer the critical question of whether their might be 2 losers in the ♥ suit. So, South should use discretion and just pass.

If North had bid 3 ♠ instead of 4 ♠, then South can at least start slam investigation. Again the critical issue is whether 2 losers exist in ♥, so South can continue as ahydra suggests cueing 4 ♦, then RKC over North's 4 ♥ cue and stop missing 2 keycards.

In both cases, the bidding is right because you got to the best percentage spot. The result just happened to be better.

[johnu]

smerriman, on 2019-January-24, 21:37, said:

Would you still like to avoid 6♠ if the spade finesse works?

That argument is silly; a slam on a finesse is usually worth being in.

But probably not in this case, since it's slightly less than 50%.

Hmmm, a less than 50% slam goes down on a finesse. Why is the argument silly? There may be other hands when the odds of making slam are exactly 50%. This isn't one of them.

[Tramticket]

This is a tricky hand to bid without more complex methods.

The 1♥ and 1♠ bids are normal. The jump to 4♠ shows hand that is strong enough to play in game opposite a typical minimum 1♠ response of 5/6 points AND it shows a fairly balanced hand (we would have splintered with a singleton or void). Since the jump to 4♠ is fairly balanced, it shows top end of a one-level opening - about 19 HCPs. The actual North hand is borderline: it has 17HCPs + two doubleton, which would usually be enough to justify the bid. Unfortunately a lot of the points are located in the two short minor suits, which suggests a possible downgrade. I would probably choose to raise to 3♠, rather than 4♠, but I understand and have some sympathy with North's assessment (particularly if it was IMPs - you should always give the form of scoring in your opening posts).

Once North opts to take the high road and bid 4♠, South must take some action. A nice 14 count, opposite an expected 19 suggests that we likely have the values for slam, so South should check for controls. Here is the problem, because you have two choices: (1) you use 4NT RKCB, find out you are missing two key cards and stop in 5♠. or (2) cue-bid your way to slam (never finding out about the king of trumps).

rmnka447, on 2019-January-25, 01:41, said:

After the auction given, the only ways to bid slam is for responder South to blast into it. RKC over 4 ♠ doesn't answer the critical question of whether their might be 2 losers in the ♥ suit.

We have about 33 HCPs between us. It would be unlucky to find that our missing 7HCPs comprised the ace and king of the suit that partner opened! It is reasonable to place partner with at least one top heart and bid RKCB.

[Cyberyeti]

Any sensible auction finds out 2 keycards are missing and signs off, 6N is a very decent spot as it has the same chance of having 12 winners as 6♠ but the heart ruff is an irrelevance.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

as was already said, missing this one is not the end of the world,
but you did not even start to investigate the possiility, and this is
something to look at.
Did you ever wonder, why you ended up sometimes in 4S with NO PLAY?

The point is, that North did overbid, he is not strong enough to bid 4S on
its own, if he does it regularly, than it is pure guesswork for South to
move on or stay.
The bid by North promises 19+, South has 14+, he only promised 6, he
should make a move facing a standard 4S opener rebid.

BUT: North has a simple 3S bid, showing 15/16-18, South can signal some life,
and you may end up in 5S missing 2 Key cards, maybe with some high tech
you can stop in 4S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on 2019-January-25, 05:08, said:

Hi,

as was already said, missing this one is not the end of the world,
but you did not even start to investigate the possiility, and this is
something to look at.
Did you ever wonder, why you ended up sometimes in 4S with NO PLAY?

The point is, that North did overbid, he is not strong enough to bid 4S on
its own, if he does it regularly, than it is pure guesswork for South to
move on or stay.
The bid by North promises 19+, South has 14+, he only promised 6, he
should make a move facing a standard 4S opener rebid.

BUT: North has a simple 3S bid, showing 15/16-18, South can signal some life,
and you may end up in 5S missing 2 Key cards, maybe with some high tech
you can stop in 4S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

What 4♠ shows is a matter of style (we actually tend to play it weak in HCP but distributional, AQxx, AKxxxx, xx, x would be typical where KJ10x and a doubleton heart may be plenty but we don't have much defence)

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-January-25, 05:54, said:

What 4♠ shows is a matter of style (we actually tend to play it weak in HCP but distributional, AQxx, AKxxxx, xx, x would be typical where KJ10x and a doubleton heart may be plenty but we don't have much defence)

This treatment is not mainstream, in my opinion. Wouldn't you splinter on your example hand? As I argued above, the jump to 4♠ will not show a distributional hand (lack of splinter) and will therefore be based primarily on High Cards.

[P_Marlowe]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-January-25, 05:54, said:

What 4♠ shows is a matter of style (we actually tend to play it weak in HCP but distributional, AQxx, AKxxxx, xx, x would be typical where KJ10x and a doubleton heart may be plenty but we don't have much defence)

Hi,

with the given hand, I would also drive towards game, but I would make a splinter bid,
due to the fact, that Partner is not limited.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on 2019-January-25, 06:21, said:

Hi,

with the given hand, I would also drive towards game, but I would make a splinter bid,
due to the fact, that Partner is not limited.

With kind regards
Marlowe

We play direct splinters as voids, good hands thru a GF unbal 2N, so 4♠ is specifically this sort of thing (and yes I'm aware this is not mainstream)

[gszes]

Let us assume for the time being you are so aggressive that you want to be in all slams that depend on a finesse for the trump K. Look at these 2 hands carefully and tell me HOW either the south player can tell the north player has the trump TEN or HOW the north player can tell the south player has the trump Q AND J? The above advice to quit worrying about every hand that happens to make is VERY sound. A player can also go in the opposite direction and become so conservative they miss out on many easy games or slams. Try to adopt and maintain a system that works under normal circumstances. Investigation techniques should be taken when there is a clear objective concerning the type of information needed and if it is available.

[nige1]

Liversidge writes '
We had this 32 HCP hand last night. We bid 4S and made 12 tricks.We still don't know how to bid it. I ran it through Jack computer software and Jack just bid game and made the slam. Give South one more point and South (Jack) bid 4NT'
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Liversidge is right that In normal circumstances, slam is reasonable with 32 HCP. adequate controls, good trumps, and a 4-4 fit.
Missing an Ace and the trump king, however, 6♠ is less than a 50% chance.


Jack might be on the right lines
6N is a fair contract but hard to reach.
Normally, 6N depends on the ♠ finesse.
With inspired views, 6N by North can sometimes survive less friendly distribution, as here.

---

[smerriman]

johnu, on 2019-January-25, 04:01, said:

Hmmm, a less than 50% slam goes down on a finesse. Why is the argument silly? There may be other hands when the odds of making slam are exactly 50%. This isn't one of them.

You seemed to be implying it was a bad slam because the finesse might fail ("do you want to be in slam if the finesse fails"). This isn't true; it's a bad slam solely because it may go down when the finesse *works*.