bluenikki

I must not have expressed myself well enough. The problem I am talking about is "agreeing" a strain where slam turns out to be poor, when there may be another strain where slam is good or even laydown. Sure, that's the breaks. But what if one of the players can foresee the danger? There needs to be a way to unagree. Below the five-level. By the way, here is something every RKC user should use: When the trump queen has been denied, 5NT should be pick-a-slam.

After partner jumpraised hearts, you can foresee exactly the trouble: You know that the partnership is very close to slam. And you know there may be trump-loser problems. If 3!s is a control bid that said only "spade ace, opening strength," that would not be a problem. But partner will not take it that way. They will hear "yes! yes! I have the spade ace and a good hand for a heart slam." And neither partner will be interested in notrump.

Advancer must get bolder! (And learn how to play 4-3 fits.)

What do you mean by low frequency? All slam deals are low frequency in the literal sense. Do you mean "marginal"? Even the third deal is marginal only if played in hearts.

Indeed! You have an easy action this round. The trouble comes later. Which you should be able to foresee!

No rabbit hole. The practice of routinely bidding bad suits is crucial for game bidding. But there are troubles with it, even outside the slam zone. Suppose the partnership has AKxx facing QJ10x in one major and Axxx facing xxxx in the other. If the strong fit is hearts, you're going to play in hearts. If the strong fit is spades, you're still going to play in hearts. Most of the time, that doesn't matter. But "most" does not mean anything like 75%. Maybe we have to pay off to this in the game zone. Maybe it's only a matter of overtricks. But there is no reason at all to settle for this in the slam zone. And, no, fixing it does not require artificial structures in the early auction.

Can you remember a case when responder's ability to splinter-raise opener's *second* suit was more than merely convenient?

Yes, but I wrote "agree" not "raise." In the slam zone, raising must not mean agreeing.

The first deal was from October 1995 "Challenge the Champs." [hv=pc=n&s=sa654haqjt4djt9ca&n=st932hk2dakq32c32&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1s]266|200[/hv] One pair got trapped in spades and could not avoid the five level. The other pair smelled a rat [unethical!]. But the best they could do was an eventual double jump to the pick-a-slam 5NT. They ended in the fourth best contract. The other two deals are from the USA trials for the 2007 Bermuda Bowl. [hv=pc=n&s=skqt92hak87dakj5c&n=sajh5432dq32cat32&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1sp1np2dp2hp]266|200[/hv] The final contracts were 7♥ once, 6♥ twice, 4♥ once, 6♠ twice, 4♠ once, and 3NT once. [hv=pc=n&s=saq4hjt65dkqt4cq3&n=sk5hak43d32cakjt2&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1hp3hp]266|200[/hv] The final contracts were 6♥, 5♥, 4♥, 6♣, all once. On that last hand, a Vugraph commentator quipped that only in a bidding contest should a pair escape from hearts. My point is that I disagree. Think: On the first two deals, if opener knew they were in the slam zone, they would know (or should!) not to introduce a bad suit on the second round. On the third hand, if responder knew they were in the slam zone, they would know (or should!) not to introduce a bad suit on the first round. In a natural system, they do not have such knowledge. But that is no reason to be dragged kicking and screaming into the wrong strain. Add some third-round bids to give yourself a chance to escape. Here's one idea. Give up responder's second-round splinter raise. Use the double jumpshift to say "We're in the slam zone, I have an honor-poor fit for your last suit." Then opener can have a reserved bid to say their suit is strong enough. So you will play either slam in the suit or in some number of notrump (including 5NT maybe!). When opener does not make the reserved bid, a suit bid is exploring a different strain. All suit bids below slam are forcing. That helps in the case when responder is the one who knows they are in the slam zone. In the case that opener has revealed a strong hand by jumpraising, give up responder's cheapest control bid. Make it the artificial "We're in the slam zone, I have an honor-poor holding in the suit you raised."

Make the auction 1♣ - 1♥; 3♥ - ? Now you are in even worse trouble.

Small spot cards are imaginary. Hint: If you "agree" partner's last bid suit, you are in trouble. [hv=pc=n&s=sa654haqjt4djt9ca&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1s]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=skqt92hak87dakj5c&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1sp1np2dp2hp]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=saq4hjt65dkqt4cq3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1dp1hp]133|200[/hv]

My philosophy, which is not original with me, is that after a takeout double, advancer has sole responsibility for competing for the partscore. Doubler bids at their second turn only if game is possible opposite the severely limited hands that make a simple suit bid.

The important thing for advancer is to be prepared to bid 1♥ in tempo. Plan it as soon as the double is made. If doubler is going to raise with that hand, it will be a good lesson for them.

As I tried to make clear, I am not complaining about what GIB should or should not do. I am interested in what to do with a human partner when there has been the absolute minimum discussion of system subtleties. That is *not* a trivial subject.

If you mean you want to gut out the xx, that will often have you down 1 in 2NT. Not to mention missing slam in whatever minor you didn't open.

Why I didn't blast 6NT: 1. The club AK may be missing. In that case, there may well be no play for 12 tricks, even if they don't cash the first two tricks. 2. The club ace may be missing. In that case, notrump is wrong-sided.

I am not interested in how to bid with robots. I am interested in what was the Master Solvers Club situation: You are playing with someone you have never met, who is regarded as a good player and agrees to play a named system. Special agreements are not available. That is why I thought the initial jumpshift was probably the most practical bid.

Surely that is only when spades have not been bid naturally!

2♦ is artificial and forcing. But opener will feel free to show secondary heart support with 543. and rebid clubs with Q97652. They don't know it's a slam auction.

You think I should fake-agree clubs and ask keycards. What is the "standard" way to sign off in 5NT? Is there any after so many suits have been bid and 5♦ would be queen-ask? But notice: I avoided a single jump in my initial response, but now I would take up at least two rounds for the ask. And that is typical, as Culbertson pointed out 90 years ago.

When I bid 1♥ opener rebid 1♠, of course. I had no option but to bid 2♦. Opener replied 2♥, of course. What do I do now Charley? There is *no* strength-showing bid available to me. I tried to temporize with 2NT. Opener bid 3♥, of course. I have much information about opener's hand. *Except* I don't know their club honor holding. And opener has no way of knowing that is what I am interested in, because they don't know we are in a slam auction. They think I am searching for the best strain for game.

With 3=2=4=4, 18-19 and xx in the doubleton, opening 1♣ would force you to rebid 2NT after a 1♠. response. (Unless you were willing to promise a longer club suit.)

[hv=pc=n&s=saq4haq82dakjc843&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1cp]133|200[/hv] In a robot imp individual, I responded 1♥ and, as I feared, I was never able to express my extremely high slam interest. On reflection, I believe I would have been better off responding 2♥ even though this would have promised "rebiddable hearts." As Charles Goren wrote in a different context, "It is better to lie about a deuce than about a king." Any other ideas? In the homegrown methods I played with my late wife, the 2NT response to any suit one-bid showed 16+ without a six-card suit or two five-cards. It worked wonderfully.

[hv=pc=n&s=saq4haq82dakjc843&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1cp]133|200[/hv] In a robot imp individual, I responded 1♥ and, as I feared, I was never able to express my extremely high slam interest. On reflection, I believe I would have been better off responding 2♥ even though this would have promised "rebiddable hearts." As Charles Goren wrote in a different context, "It is better to lie about a deuce than about a king." Any other ideas? In the homegrown methods I played with my late wife, the 2NT response to any suit one-bid showed 16+ without a six-card suit or two five-cards. It worked wonderfully.

when you are declaring a 4-3, you don't call it being forced. You call it reversing the dummy.