akhare

foobar (Atul) and straube (David) will be there. If you can find Chris Gibson, you should be able to find us as well. We are team mates and hopefully, we'll still be on talking terms when you find us (just kidding :D)...

I think that varying both hands in terms of shape and / or strength will be good. Also, it will be interesting to post a few problematic hands (from real life or constructed) that attempt to exercise some of the potentially problematic areas (strength in short suits, etc.). Another variation might be introduce the possibility zooming past the safety net at the 5-level (either by introducing minor suit slams or by introducing major suit shapes that end at 3♠+.

That's a very interesting comment and the optimal approach might depend on the control scan method. For example, PCB (scan all suits *once*, including singletons) is arguably better than DCB at picking stiffs. Also, there's a question the question on whether stiff Ks should be counted as 2 or 1 (I think almost everyone counts A=3 regardless and ignores stiff Qs).

...3D Given that we will need at least two Aces, it seems like RKC ♠ is the best start. ...3S...4D (2 key cards, no QS). Now that we are past the first hurdle, it's OK to move on since we will likely survive the 5-level even opposite just two Aces. ...4N...5S (fishing for K♥; no control in ♥) 5♠ will end the auction unless the state of the match dictates otherwise.

Heh...fixed typo. A / K is technically a GF response given the 5 QP stipulation.

...3D Given the misfit, we aren't going anywhere unless responder can super accept. ...3N...4C (Attempted sign off; 8 QPs) Even with this information, it's really difficult to get very excited, because we the hand almost certainly has 2 Aces (something magical like AXX K KQJTx Qxx is possible, but it seems like a real stretch). Ergo: ...4N (sorry, not interested)

...3♦ Even with the 10-card trump fit, we aren't going anywhere without some serious oomph. RKC ♥ won't get us the information in time before the 5-level and might not survive it opposite x Kxxxx Axxx xxx. So: 3♥...4♣ (QP ask, 8 QPs) Now that have 5-level insurance even opposite A Kxxxx A xxx: 4♦....5♣ (DCB; controls in ♥/♦/♣, no second ♥) 5♦....5♠ (DCB; second ♦, no second ♣) 6♥ Even with a 5♥ response (A Kxxxx Kxxx Qxx), slam is 50%.

Ditto

...3♦ With the weak doubleton and a 2 outside losers, it's difficult to see us going anywhere without some Ace power. However, if we RKC, we might in over our heads at the 5-level, so it's seems best to use the QP ask. ...3H...4♦ (QP ask; 9 QPs) ...4♥...4N (DCB; ♠ control, AKQ of ♦ or nothing) ...6♠ (can't picture 9 QP hand without AKQ of ♦+A♠)

...3D Both QPs ask and RKC ♠ would work well on this hand. Responder can have as little as XXXXX K KQX QXXX on a bad day, but a holding like Axxxx x KQx Qxxx is enough to give us an chance and we won't get that information without DCB. Ergo: 3H....4C (QP ask, 8 QPs) 4♦...4N (DCB, ♠/♦ controls, AKQ of ♣ or nothing) At this point, we might still have two Aces and K♥, Q♣, but since we have the luxury of the ♠ suit, we can soldier on: 5♣ - 5♦ (DCB; no second ♠ card) 5♥ - 5N(DCB (smugly); second ♦ card) 6♠

...3♦ We need 7+ QPs to have any hope at all and on a bad day, the 7 QP holding could be A♠, AQ of ♦. RKC ♥ seems really sub-optimal on this hand: ...3♥ - 3N (QP ask, 7 QPs) At this point, even opposite the dreaded AXXX XXX AQXXX x, we are odds on to make 5♥ so: 4♣...4♥ (DCB; A/K of ♦, AKQ of ♠ or nothing) Responder must have XXXX KXX AKXXX x or better and slam is ~50% at worst: 6♥

...3♦ With the hands not meshing very well, slam is a stretch unless we have a combined total of 20+ QPs. Since responder will zoom on @ 4+♣ with 3 QPs above base, we have a choice of asking for QPs or just signing off in 3N. In this case, it seems marginally better to just bid 3N and declare the hand (if possible). Note that since the auction would have terminated at 3N after an ask since 3♠ is 5/6QPs. ...3N

In that case, I won't post an auction unless it's different (subjectively or otherwise). BTW, I was planning on using 5+ QPs for the positive responses, with the first step in the QP ask showing 5/6.

Yes...just realized that flaw. I think RKC is pretty decent here: ..3♦ Since responder must have at least two key cards to have any hope: 3♠ - 4♦ (RKC ♥; two key cards including K♥) Things are looking brighter: 4N - 5♥ (♠ ask; (no ♠ control, ergo K♥/A♦)

...3♦ Since responder must have at least two key cards to have any hope: 3♠ - 4♦ (RKC ♥; A♦, K♥ perforce) Things are looking brighter, but since 4♠ ask looking for !spades controls is meaningless, 4N looking for information about ♦: 4N - 5♦ (♦ ask; Q or AK or ♦) 5♥ (sign off) Note that in the above, I am assuming that since we already showed the Ace of diamonds, 5♦ unambiguously shows Q♦ See corrected auction below.

Just for fun, I will throw in: S1: QP ask, followed by DCB S2 - S5: RKC ask based on length with ties broken in symmetric order (except for the canonical 3N and 4♦ canonical terminators)

As I recall, there have been several threads in this forum regarding coping with interference over 1♣. IMO, the X as 5-7 any isn't a very good treatment and the X is best reserved for takeout shapes. In this case, given the sensational shape and void in their suit, the best option might be bite the bullet and GF with 2♣ (in anticipation of a 4♥ bid). Depending on how sophisticated you want to get, you can try playing a scheme that uses transfers at the 2-level. For example, over 1♥ / 1♠: X: Takeout, 5+ points 1♠: Natural 1N: Natural GF 2♣ - 2♠: Transfers, constructive 2N+: Transfers, weaker You will have to come up with some rules about how to deal with 2-level interference, but this is a start...

Another downside is consider to consider that it pushes the RKC asks by 1 or 2 steps (except for auctions that terminate in 3♠).

What is the order of suits for the RKC ask? Is it by the relative length of suits with some tie breaker for equal length suits?

Why would this hand want to bid again, especially with the stiff ♣? Pard had two chances to 5♦ after all, the caveat about undisciplined notwithstanding.

IMPs, NV. vs. V. LHO opens the bidding. 1♦ was 0+ with 11- 15 and pard overcalled 1♥. 1♠ showed 5+ and was NF. [hv=pc=n&n=sj82h64dakqt2ca52&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1d(0+%2C% 11-15)1h1s(5+%2C%20not%20forcing)d2sppdp3dpp3spp]133|200[/hv]

Richard, As straube noted, we use S1 as DCB and its efficacy isn't in question. The question here that whether the subsequent steps that are reserved for RKC should be fixed (in the ♣, ♦, ♥, ♠ order) or whether they should be dynamically based on length of responder's suits (a la Moscito). My conjecture is that the latter approach is superior.

IMP, vul. vs. not, expert opps. You deal and hold: AKXX XXX AJ98 XX The auction proceeds: 1♦ (systemically 15 HCPs max.) - 1♥ - X (exactly 4♠) - 4♥. What's your call?

Richard, good to see you posting around these parts again. What do you have so say about the original question about whether the RKC ask should be based on the relative lengths of suits (instead of assigning fixed slots for specific suits)? My conjecture is that the relay captain is likely to want to ask about the first (or second longest suit), but I don't have any data to back it up. One option might be deal hands with say a combined total of say 18 - 21 QPs (the slave hand has a one or two suited distribution). We can then compute the QPs in the two longest suits and the DD tricks and examine the hands that do make slam. Comments or suggestions?

The Python port of Thomas Andrew's Deal (search the forum) is good for simulations (the original is an excellent tool as well if TCL tickles you :D). You can find the original dealer.exe in the wayback archives if you prefer the more sparse syntax and don't need to do much scripting. For DD analysis of hand records and other interesting statistics, try DDS: http://www.bridge-captain.com/DDS_Setup.exe