BPO-007C

[inquiry]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=sa76ha8d2c8765432]133|100|BPO-007C

West North East South

(Pass) 2NT   (pass)   3♠

(Pass) 3NT   (pass)   ?

 

[/hv]

 

This one is ready for discussion. I guess it is no surprise on this one that one pair stopped low, the other moved to slam. What makes is not the issue, how to evaluate the hand and proceed is.

[hrothgar]

BPO-007C: 4NT

 

Ah, the great slam killer strikes again... Our partnership has used

up enough bidding spade that we don't have a prayer of making an

intelligent decision. Partner has just bid 3NT and our system notes

don't even specify if our 4C rebid is forcing or not. (Logically, if

4C shows clubs, it can't be forcing. You clearly want the opening

lead coming into the 2NT bidder. Ergo, if I want to make a forcing

bid that shows clubs, I should bid ANYTHING but 4C. For example, we

could play that 4C is forcing with long Diamonds and 4D is forcing

with long Clubs)

 

With two Aces and a 7 card suit opposite a 2NT opener, the only thing

that you care about is cover cards in clubs. If you have 0-1 losers

in clubs, you want to be in 6C. If you have 2 losers in clubs, you

want to be in 5C. Sadly, I don't know how to proceed.(Our 3S gimmick

isn't documents in the BBO Advanced Notes. Nor are follow-ups

described in the FD card. I also couldn't find the treatment

documented Kearse or Lindkvist) I am going to proceed under the

assumption that 4NT is a transfer to 5C (and 5C would be a transfer to

5D). I'll raise 5C to 6. (Slam makes a very large percentage of the time. I admit that I'm making a blind guess, but playing 5♣ or 3N is way too much of a position)

 

I wish I had some way to make a more intelligent decision...

[pclayton]

I checked the BBO notes on this. 3♠ is a puppet to 3N for "minor suit hands". I assume it is a single suited slam try. I also assume 4 of a major is 2 suited in the minor with shortness. Continuations are undiscussed.

 

I play that 4♣ and 4♦ are 'flip-flop'; slam try in the other minor. If Opener bids the next highest suit, it is RKC. A new suit is a cue; 4N is a minimum with no fit.

 

Apparently we bid 3♠ with the presumption that we would continue with 4♣ over 3N.

 

So I guess I don't understand the problem.............

[HeartA]

Apparently we bid 3♠ with the presumption that we would continue with 4♣ over 3N.

 

So I guess I don't understand the problem.............

I voted for 4C anyway.

[Walddk]

You are not alone Phil. This is what it says in our system notes:

 

2NT = 20-21 HCP

Stayman, Jacoby, Texas, Smolen, Gerber

3♠-->3N for minor suit hands

 

I don't think this is an adequate description when the continuation after 3NT is not outlined. It doesn't even stipulate if opener is allowed to break the transfer. Consequently, I suggest 100 points for any bid thereafter.

 

Roland

[Gerben42]

Agree. Anyway I voted for 4♣, I suited slam try in ♣.

[Blofeld]

4♣.

 

This one seemed to be a case of 'guess the system bid'.

[whereagles]

7 losers opposite an expected 6-cover card opening = 12 tricks on average. I'll just bid 6♣. After all, I'll be playing it :)

[luke warm]

i voted 6♣ ... still wearing the same glasses... cant bid 4♣ which is, after all, gerbersohl

[Free]

4♣, the system agreed clearly states this was what we always were planning to bid...

[han]

Edit: no useful info, sorry.

[Walddk]

I didn't check the system, and I don't remember what I bid :-(.

Thanks for the useful info. What else do you not remember? :P

 

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

 

Marlowe

[Double !]

FWIW, I opted for 4 clubs/ 3NT, assuming that this is forcing to at least 4NT.

 

I have no idea what are the commonly agreed-upon follow bids after this point, but making some move toward a possible 6C contract holding 4 controls and a stiff seems reasonable to me (which definitely must mean that it's wrong).

 

If the opps inquire about any bids after this point, I guess I will have to whip out the old "no agreement" response one more time.

OK, Who's the wise guy who decided t torment us with these hands? lolol--I love the challenge.

 

DHL

[Echognome]

4♣ was my system guess.

[Dwingo]

BBO Advanced states that 3♠ is a Puppet to 3NT for further (slam) tries in minor single suiter or minor two suiters. So this appears to be a straightforward system bid of 4♣, unless it is intended as a trick question.

[Finch]

I looked in the BBO system notes in this forum, and they say

 

"After 3♠ forcing 3N, 4♣ = Single suited Clubs, 4♦ = Single suited Diamonds, 4♥/♠ = shortness with 5-5 in minors"

 

So 4♣ is the defined system bid on the hand, so I bid 4♣. I struggled slightly to work out what the problem was on this round of the auction.

[helene_t]

I thought 3NT was negative so I passed. Didn't check the system notes, though. Wow, this time my comment was just as useful as Han's, I'm improving I guess :-)

[Winstonm]

I voted for 5C in an attempt to get the message across that I wanted to make a slam try but couldn't due to my lousy trumps.

 

Winston

[cherdano]

I looked in the BBO system notes in this forum, and they say

 

"After 3♠ forcing 3N, 4♣ = Single suited Clubs, 4♦ = Single suited Diamonds, 4♥/♠ = shortness with 5-5 in minors"

 

So 4♣ is the defined system bid on the hand, so I bid 4♣. I struggled slightly to work out what the problem was on this round of the auction.

I think you deserve full marks for your efforts.

[han]

Wow, this time my comment was just as useful as Han's, I'm improving I guess :-)

Some might disagree with that logic Helene.

 

 

Feeling bad about my earlier useless info I am determined to say something useful now. As I see it there are at least three ways to show a clubs-single suiter: by bidding 5C directly, bidding 3S followed by 4C and bidding 3S followed by 5C. It is clear that the direct 5C is to play (even though partner might bid 6C on some unusual hands), and that 3S followed by 5C is less encouraging than 3C followed by 4C.

 

As the 3S-5C route suggests no interest in cuebids, perhaps it should focus on the club suit only, asking partner to bid slam with good club support. That agreement would work out well with this hand (even though partner would probably not think that Axx is good enough?).

 

Another possible interpretation is that 3S followed by 5C shows a great club suit, but not much outside of clubs. In that case partner would probably bid 6C with Kxx Kxx AKQJx Ax, something we definitely do not want.

 

Without an agreement I think that 3S-4C is best, but if you are confident that 3S-5C asks for club support then that would be best.

[hrothgar]

With all due respect to a number of my friends who are voting in favor of 4♣, this bid should get a zero.

 

As I already noted, the only way assigning a "natural" meaning to 4♣ makes sense is if the bid is non-forcing and there is NO way in hell you can consider a non-forcing 4♣ rebid with this hand.

 

If 4♣ is defined as natural and forcing, than we need to change the system. The advantage of right siding a 5m or 6m contract is overwhelming and a simple 5♣/5♦ inversion is the obvious fix.

[cherdano]

With all due respect to a number of my friends who are voting in favor of 4♣, this bid should get a zero. 

 

As I already noted, the only way assigning a "natural" meaning to 4♣ makes sense is if the bid is non-forcing and there is NO way in hell you can consider a non-forcing 4♣ rebid with this hand.

 

If 4♣ is defined as natural and forcing, than we need to change the system.  The advantage of right siding a 5m or 6m contract is overwhelming and a simple 5♣/5♦ inversion is the obvious fix.

Let me quote from the BBO advanced notes:

After 3♠ forcing 3N, 4♣ = Single suited Clubs, 4♦ = Single suited Diamonds,

4♥/♠ = shortness with 5-5 in minors.

I think it's you who gets the zero, my friend ;) (And please don't tell me Fred intended these bids as non-forcing.)

 

Arend

[hrothgar]

I think it's you who gets the zero, my friend ;) (And please don't tell me Fred intended these bids as non-forcing.)

I'm well aware what the BBO Advanced notes say, however, playing these bids as natural and forcing is incomprehensible to me...

 

I know that Fred and tend to differ about artificial systems. However, it incomprehensible to assume that players are capable of recalling that 3♠ is a puppet to 3N, but using 4♣ to show Diamonds and 4♦ to show clubs is suddenly too complex?

 

Be real.

 

BTW, I'm well aware the 4♣ = clubs and 4♦ = diamonds ensure equal amounts of bidding space for each response. I still think that rightsiding the contract is an overwhelming advantage.

[mikeh]

With all due respect to a number of my friends who are voting in favor of 4♣, this bid should get a zero. 

 

As I already noted, the only way assigning a "natural" meaning to 4♣ makes sense is if the bid is non-forcing and there is NO way in hell you can consider a non-forcing 4♣ rebid with this hand.

 

If 4♣ is defined as natural and forcing, than we need to change the system.  The advantage of right siding a 5m or 6m contract is overwhelming and a simple 5♣/5♦ inversion is the obvious fix.

As Luis pointed out concerning another of the hands, it is essential to remember that this is a poll about what one would bid given the constraints of the poll. In Luis' case, the point was that the auction was undiscussed in the system notes, while here, to the contrary, the system defines what 4♣ means. Thus complaining that it is a poor system and that it wrongsides the contract is all well and good but utterly off the point.

 

While it is true that usually one wants the stronger hand protected against the opening lead, this actual hand is an exception. I have Aces.... see them? The only suit in which my partner might have a meaningful tenace to protect is trump, and it doesn't matter who declarer is in terms of protecting the trump suit.

 

Give partner QJ10 in one of my Ace suits and I'd enjoy being declarer on a lead of that suit twice as often as my partner would ;)

 

As for the idea that one would force to 3N and then bid a non-forcing 4♣(which I think another poster suggested, not Hrothgar): the idea is absurd, to put it as mildly as I can manage.