louisg

2H. Perfect description.

Here's another question for the passers (or those who would respond 1H and pass over 2S with a slightly weaker version of the original hand): Let's say that 2S was your systemic rebid with a hand like ♠AKx ♥AKJx ♦AQJxx ♣x (i.e., "too good to splinter"). Of course, your agreements include ways to show this hand type as the auction continues (and still stop in 4H opposite true junk). Would you still be willing to pass this out in 2S?

I just didn't think I could afford to go past 3NT with my aceless minimum. Partner could hold some ordinary 4=5=3=1 like KJxx AKJxx Axx x where 3NT is easily our best game.

OK, sounds like it's time for the full story. My partner held the hand in question, and chose to bid 3D. Did he think about the possible positional disadvantages before choosing that bid? I don't know; I haven't asked him. The reason I thought about them was that the full deal was as follows (note how close one of gnasher's constructions was): [hv=d=s&n=sxxhxdkqtxxckqjtx&s=skxxxhakjxxdaxcax]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] And our auction was: 1♥-2♦ 2♠-3♣ 3♦-3NT 4♣-4♦ 4♥-5♣ 5NT-6♣ Pass All things considered, I thought we did well to play in clubs (the more solid trump suit) even if 6C is slightly less than 50% to make. Full credit to partner's 5NT (pick a slam) bid. Of course, looking at both hands you'd want to be in 6NT by South, and I was curious to see if anyone chose to bid NT for that reason. If anyone cares, the SA was onside and both minors were 4-2, so we made it.

Almost unanimous support for 3♦; I must admit I'm a little surprised. Is anyone worried about protecting the ♠K in a possible 6NT contract? Over 3♦ partner could easily be forced to rebid 3NT with nothing in spades.

[hv=d=s&s=skxxxhakjxxdaxcax]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♥-2♦ 2♠-3♣ 2♦=GF unless opener shows a minimum and responder rebids 3♦ 2♠=extra values, GF, almost always 4+ cards 3♣=natural It seems to me that reasonable options for South include: 3♦ -- marking time and looking for more information 4NT -- quantitative 5NT -- pick a slam 3NT would clearly be an underbid, and 4♦ would show better support in the partnership style. What is your choice, and why? Are there any other options to consider?

This seems to be the crux of the issue. Is 4H such a well defined bid in this auction (comparable to an opening 1NT or a weak 2, as others have suggested) that partner is in complete control of the auction? I think in practice we all recognize that 4H might be bid with a reasonably wide variety of hands. Would it not be reasonable to assume that the 4H bidder can reopen with a double to say "4H was not purely preemptive, so now you can bid on if you like", and by so doing allow doubler's direct 5H bid to be more of a constructive effort? I take it from most of the comments here that this approach is not considered standard, but why not? Certainly the doubler's hand is unlimited, and there is considerable value in giving him an opportunity to better define his range. One more point: I don't think I would characterize my view of 5H as "a slam try", but I don't understand the eagerness to bid 5H as a save when the opponents were forced to guess at the 5 level and partner might hold some defensive values. I would say therefore that 5H was bid with the expectation of making it, and partner should be free to act again opposite such a hand.

If partner had wanted to invite us to bid more, how could he have done so? If your answer is 5D, imagine a similar auction where our suits are touching.

Yes, I'm definitely implying that 5H shows extras. In fact, I'm not just implying it :)

How about xxx KTxxxx x Axx? Given that we are now pretty sure that partner has a club void (they figure to be 6-4 on everyone's bidding), isn't this hand a full trick worse than the actual one? Wouldn't "taking a shot with like a club void and 4 hearts and a 9 count" be breaking discipline? This isn't a forcing pass situation, so partner should be passing with a minimum double, shouldn't he? Believe me, I'm not claiming that it's clear to bid on here (that's why I posted), but these arguments haven't convinced me.

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sxxxhktxxxxdacjtx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 12 board team match, all experts Auction: 1C Dbl 2C 4H 5C 5H Pass ?

6♣. I have a high card maximum and everything is working, so some slam must be good. Let's give partner a chance to do the right thing with hands like: Axx KJxxxx x AQx or AQx AKxxxx x Qxx

It occurs to me that 5NT here might be taken as showing the guarded DK, offering 6NT as a possible contract. Perhaps it would be better for opener to bid 6♥, which invites 7♠ and should show the HK as well as 1st round diamond control. In any case, my main point was in the value of responder's 5♠ call.

The following seems simple and straightforward, yet no one else has suggested it. Am I missing something? 1♠-2♥ 3♣(1)-5♠(2) 5NT(3)-7♠ (1) Extras (2) "Bid 6 with a diamond control" (3) "Bid 7 with 2/3 top spades"