Hand from last night

[TheoKole]

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sj9xxhj10xxda109xxc]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

I am South when the bidding goes

 

P - P - 2♣ - P

2 ♦ - P - 2 NT - P

3 ♣ - P - 3 ♠ - P

???

 

Is there any way to describe the playing potential of this hand to partner at a safe level? We play 2 ♦ response as waiting unless I have a dynamite suit to state,

 

Can I cue bid ♦ and then go back to ♠? Will ♠ have been agreed to in this sequence or is this a ♦ suit with a ♠ cuebid?

 

Will partner understand when I go back to ♠, what if he bids ♣ as a suit ?

 

Can I show my ♣ void in any way?

 

Partner and I talked about the hand afterward and he couldn't find a reasonable answer either and we are a practiced partnership.

 

For any results merchants among us in hidden text below for those who are not. :P

 

 

 

 

The hand is cold for 6 ♠ because of the ♣ void.

 

 

 

 

By the way, I bid 4 ♠ at the table which ended the auction although I had a nagging feeling....

 

I leave it to you.

 

Theo

[han]

I play that 4C and 4D are natural here, I have no other way to bid with 4 hearts and 5 cards in a minor.

 

However, 4H can't be natural. Why would you bid Stayman if you actually wanted to play in hearts (even when partner has spades)? I play this as a slam try in hearts, but it doesn't say much and there is little room left to investigate.

 

I would probably blast 5C, exclusion RKC. Not very scientific, but the best I can think of.

 

 

BTW did 3S show 4 or 5 spades? I would bid 5C anyway.

[mike777]

Well this hand will get many responses.

 

I blame 2d response.

 

 

Prefer 2d=waiting game force promise at least one K.

 

Prefer 2h=deny A or K, but in theory could be 12 small hcp so not total negative but not forcing..so partner needs to bid much.

 

now lets try FTL

 

assume p has 22-23 hcp ok?

assume p is 4324 ok?

 

that means:

13-2+2=12 tricks ok?

13=total tricks

minus 2=combined 2 short suits estimate

plus 2=estimate 25-27 working hcp.

 

 

exclusion blackwood works great for the 1000 or 2000 pairs worldwide that play it often.

[Guest Jlall]

Agree 4H artificial slam try is very useful and common these days. As Han said, 4H cannot be natural, so it's very nice. However it will be pard to evaluate here so it's not perfect.

 

over 3H 3S would be the slam try and that offers you a lot more room.

[TheoKole]

Hannie,

 

I thought about 5 ♣ exclusion Blackwood, and my partner and I have discussed it, but is this safe? This is IMP's not Matchpoints.

 

Remember, my partner bid 2NT as a rebid, promising 22 to 24 points, also his

3 ♠ resonse to Stayman promised 4 spades not 5. With 5 spades he would have bid the suit on the second round, which would have solved my problem as I would have splintered in ♣.

 

By the way, 4 ♣ and 4 ♦ would also be normal suits for us in this sequence.

 

Theo

[mike777]

Note FTL just bids 6s over 3s. If your science is better use it.

[Blofeld]

5♣ isn't entirely safe, if partner has solid clubs and they have three quick tricks against you, but it seems fairly safe.

 

I prefer 6♠ to 4♠. I think it only marginally more likely that 4♠ is the last making spot than that we have a grand slam (certainly if I hear we've got all the keycards I'll go hunting for the grand if methods permit).

[Gerben42]

First choice: 5♣ exclusion blackwood, at least using the possibility to stop in 5 rather than

Second choice: 6♠

 

I guess since 7 is cold opposite the perfect 19-count, bidding 4 opposite 23 seems too passive.

 

AKQx

Ax

KQJ

xxxx

[bigmax]

I think that 4♠ is ok - slam is not that clear.

 

But if one wants to invite, what about 4♦ - natural, forcing and then 5♠ after any (well, except rkc) responce by pd?

 

At least partner shd like his ♦ honors and be invited on quality of ♠'s. While 5 level isn't safe, I don't see any meaningful slam invite below it.

[Gerben42]

How about bidding 4♦ then 5♠ on this?

[hv=s=shjxxxdqjxxxxcaxx]133|100|[/hv]

[inquiry]

4♠ is too timid. Partner has 22-24 (something like that) and four plus spades (my system, exactly four spades). To show why this is timid, lets use esitmated ZAR points.... Partner rates to have 22 hcp, at least 7 controls (he does have more than half the deck of hcp) and average of 10 DP for 39 ZAR points. You have 14DP, +6hcp, and 2 CP of 22. Add to that 4 ZAR fit points for a total of 26. 39+26 = 66 more than enough for slam (assuming not off two quick tricks).

 

Even if partner has the "wasted AKQ" of clubs, That might provide three heart pitches, so the five level seems perfectly safe. So 5♣ exclusion seems prudent.

 

The problem here is the nature of the 2NT bid. Sure it describes openers hand well, but you are at three spades, with responder yet to bid naturally and the only FIT showing bid below 4♠ is 4♥. Sadly, 4♥ just will not describe this hand.

 

Ben

[bigmax]

How about bidding 4♦ then 5♠ on this?

Dealer: ?????

Vul: ????

Scoring: Unknown

♠

♥ Jxxx

♦ QJxxxx

♣ Axx

 

Well, may be. Does one have a way to show minor 1 suiter? 3s after 2n?

 

 

Then I would bid 5s directly, without 4d. No s loosers seems to be the key for good slam.

 

Btw, does one play 03/14 or 14/03 exlusion. 14/03 would not work here, since you can not ask sq.

[Blofeld]

But with four hearts that isn't a minor 1-suiter.

[inquiry]

If you have a minor one suiter, why start with 3♣? I use ETM victory stuff here quite nicely...

 

2NT - 3S == transfer to 3NT either to play or with minor(s). Over 3S

 

Pass is to play (duh)

4C/4D = minor suit smolen (longer in other minor), slam try

4H/4S = single suiter in minor (H = clubs). slam try

4NT = quantitative with 4-4 in minors

 

2NT - 4C = major two suiter

2NT - 4D = GERBER, asking for aces

2NT = 4H = minor two suiter, equal legnth, 5-5 or better

2NT = 4S = club transfer, not invitatonal. Responder will be in control

2NT = 4NT = Quantitative, flat hand (not 4432)

2NT = 5♣ = Diamond transfer, not invitational. Responder will be in control

2NT = 5D = BARON, SLAM FORCE, looking for fit up the line.

 

You don't need to play this method, but you should have some way to shwo a minor one suiter without starting with stayman.

[mikeh]

As someone who often offers possible hands for auctions, I find it amusing when I read of the perfect 19 counts being offered up as reason for driving to slam. What about imperfect 24 counts?

 

KQxx KQx KQx AKQJ is 25 hcp and yet slam is down off the top even with a 3-2 trump break.

 

As for FTL and so on, I respect that these arithmetical methods can assist in determining whether a player should be thinking about going to a certain level, but this kind of approach cannot prevail in good competition. I see nothing in FTL that offers any guide to how many Aces the opps will cash :) I find that my success in slam bidding is often contingent on that factor.

 

This is a tough hand, and the 4♥ slam try (which I play) is not perfect, but surely it is better than either giving up or blasting.

 

Partner will not know about your void, but he will upgrade good trump and controls and downgrade hands with lots of Q's and J's.

 

Of course, the poster did not have this tool available. At the table, the only other generic slam try seems to be 5♠. This has to show an odd hand, and if partner thinks that it asks about trump quality, there is nothing wrong with that, given your holding.

 

The long term solution is to improve the methods in use. Cheaper other major as a suit-agreeing slam try is easy, low cost (what else is 4♥ used for, altho I suppose 3♠ over 3♥ might have other uses) and easy to remember.

[Winstonm]

My thinking for what it's worth.

 

Is there a pefect minimum hand for partner that makes slam virtually laydown?

 

AKQx

Ax

KQx

KJxx

 

Answer: yes.

 

Is there a safe way to find this out?

 

Answer: Depends on agreements. If not, then stop. When there is no way to find out for sure, the wisest course is to secure the game bonus and ignore a speculative slam bonus.

 

"Whatever you're looking for, I haven't got." Bob Hamman.

 

Winston

[TheoKole]

Thank you for all your responses, I appreciate them all.

 

I agree that I was too timid on this hand and this is probably what was bothering me, as I should have seen that the hand should be safe for 5 spades.

 

Exclusion Blackwood or other major slam try (Goldman I beleive it is called?) is probably the best solution.

 

Thanks again for your help :)

 

Theo

[Finch]

With a couple of very well-defined and rare exceptions, I don't play exclusion blackwood.

 

I would bid 5C over 3S, showing a club void and asking partner to evaluate his/her hand in that context.

 

I find it more useful to be able to say

"I have a club void and (at least) a slam try. You can drive to slam if you are very suitable, you can cue bid a red suit if you are interested but not certain (or on the way to bidding slam) or you can sign off in our suit (sometimes in NT as well) if you are unsuitable"

 

than to be able to say

"Please tell me how many keycards you have with spades as trumps excluding clubs"

 

You don't tell us how many HCP 2NT showed, but suppose partner has either

 

AKQx

AKx

KQx

Qxx

 

or

 

AKQx

AQx

Jxx

AKx

 

In both cases he has the same shape and the same number of non-club keycards, but one hand is virtually cold for grand, the other is very dubious at the 6-level.

 

Isn't it better to have a conversation with partner than to ask only one specific question?

[Guest Jlall]

I agree with Frances. Exclusion keycard is very overrated and overused, especially when your space is limited. Especially with a hand like this you want cooperation and partner to evaluate, you dont want to know how many keycards he has.

[Trpltrbl]

Guestimating with Zar it tells me I should have slam.

Therefore I will bid 5♣ exclusion.

I am sure people can come up with hands where grandslam is cold and where maybe game has hard time making, but this is my guideline, and I am using it.

 

GBB :P

[han]

I find it more useful to be able to say

"I have a club void and (at least) a slam try. You can drive to slam if you are very suitable, you can cue bid a red suit if you are interested but not certain (or on the way to bidding slam) or you can sign off in our suit (sometimes in NT as well) if you are unsuitable"

 

than to be able to say

"Please tell me how many keycards you have with spades as trumps excluding clubs"

I absolutely agree with you Frances, a void-showing slam try is much more useful than asking for keycards with this hand and probably almost always in this auction. I wish I had this agreement too, I don't.

 

Of course, it is easier (for memory's sake) to play excl-RKC in all such auctions then to play exclusion sometimes and void showing at others. Would you care to post the rules that you prefer?

 

When opener accepts the void-showing slam try, does she show keycards (not counting club ace of course), bypassing 5S? That seems like a great idea, you can have the best of both worlds!

[omeroj]

4♣ i will bid...as cue bid and fit ♠; simple bid that can go to slam

 

 

Omero