why not 6H?

[kgr]

[hv=d=w&v=b&n=sak96ht54dak53cqj&s=sqj5hakq987dt9ck5]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

1NT-2D

2H-3C-(DBL)

3NT-4H

All pass

Pickup. SAYC and no special agreements.

Opps are silent except the DBL of 3C.

Who is responsible for not reaching 6H?

[Cascade]

I dislike 3♣. I hate having to make bids in non-existent suits. The question is how do you make a slam try with a single-suited hand in SAYC. I believe the answer is a direct jump to 3Maj is single-suited and slammish.

 

Having said that 3NT is a truely bad bid. North has a maximum, first and second round control in both unbid suits and heart support and from North's perspective even the ♣QJ look like gold when partner bids the suit. You must cooperate with such a hand.

[Guest Jlall]

3C was a terrible bid, passing 4H was a terrible bid.

 

Partner showed 6-4 and obviously a slam try (otherwise he would just texas) so QJ of clubs AK, AK, and 3 hearts are the nuts. 3N was a terrible bid as well, north should bid 3H to show partner 3 card support.

 

South showed a slam try but misdescribed his hand. He should bid 2D then 5H to just show a generic good slam try, or 4D then 4N to ask for keycards if he wants to force to slam.

[neilkaz]

Why doesn't N, who has good cards for slam cooperate with an obvious 3♦ bid rather than 3NT ?

 

Also, N could just pass the dbl of 3♣ in case, as is played by many S has a real ♣ suit.

 

EDIT by NK...I think a pass of 3♣x needs a bit better support than a doubleton QJ bcuz it could possibly get set.

 

South could still take a chance to go higher, since N really shouldn't be bidding 3NT here if he's concerned about being set off the top in ♣, but I place most of the blame squarely on North.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[sceptic]

why not bid 4NT not 3 clubs (I am probably wrong here, but it looks like a good bet with ur hcp and suit quality)

[whereagles]

South has 5 loser. Expectancy of a 1NT opener is 4 cover cards. South should press on to slam unless North frowns :)

[HeartA]

As others said, South misdescribed his hand. But that should make the bidding easier for this hand. North, with primary cards in unbid suits and QJ support for pd's 2nd suit, should cooperate with 3D.

 

Having said that, I would probably bid as follows if I were South:

1N - 4D

4H - 4N

...

6H.

[kenrexford]

Tools would have helped here, but your parameters are "no special agreements." In that case, I can understand the thinking behind the 3♣ call, and even the 3NT call, and even the 4♥ signoff. Every bid has a certain logic to it.

 

Sure, the ideal solution, in retrospect, might be a simple transfer and then jump to 5♥, but the double top control holes for good cause worried South. Hence, he bid 3♣, prepared to convert to hearts after any level of club raise, figuring that at least this showed slam interest, with concentration of values roughly equivalent in purpose to concentration of controls..

 

Sure, North could make a slam move, but one sole cover card in the two suits seems a tad light. Further, should'nt 3NT, as opposed to passing, show extras? Or, is a pass stronger? Not sure...

 

Then, North dislikes the Kx after the double. Is not North more likely to have Qxx that QJ tight? Even with QJ tight, that's quite a HCP drop for one trick. Plus, South is sort of boxed in, as he cannot re-cue 4♣ intelligently, and he lacks any side control with which to stab out.

 

Ultimately, I'll blame South. That 3NT call sounds like stuff. I'm not all that disenchanted with the 3♣ call, but, after 3NT freely, South should probably move to at least 5♥ now.

[Cascade]

Ultimately, I'll blame South. That 3NT call sounds like stuff. I'm not all that disenchanted with the 3♣ call, but, after 3NT freely, South should probably move to at least 5♥ now.

I think 3NT should be more like

 

♠ KQJx

♥ xx

♦ KQJx

♣ QJx

[jikl]

My thoughts on the auction in reverse order for each bid. :)

 

The final pass was forced by the previous bad bidding.

 

The 4♥ bid was his own fault, see 3♣ below.

 

That 3NT bid is really bad, the strongest bid north can make is 3♥, this has to say I have slam aspirations and set trumps.

 

The 3♣ bid got south into some trouble and is probably what scared south into 4♥ instead of something higher. He now thinks West has ♣AQxxx(x) and they are losing the 1st 2 tricks, which means he has wrongsided the contract by transferring.

 

I don't even know whether I like the 2♥ bid, this must be damn close to a superaccept (assuming 15-17 NT).

 

The 2♦ bid I don't like, I think I would have bid 3♥ slam-going with 6 card ♥ suit. Seems to fit quite well. :)

 

The 1NT bid was good. :P

 

Sean

[Codo]

I won´t be too hars with the 3 ♣ bid. I guess a lot of people play it as second suit OR advanced cue bid. So 3 NT was clearly the worst bid ever followed by 2♦. 3 ♣ is just the third worse bid :)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

which bid I hate most: 3C.

who is responsible for not reaching 6H: responder,

he did want to go sientific, when he was playing with

no agreements, he would have got what he deserved,

if opener would have passed 3C, but the oppoenents

were nice guys doubling 3C, i.e. responder could have

recovered.

 

After 1 NT bid 3H, and over the 4H answer either

pass or bid 4NT followed by 6H.

Keep it simple.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

Responder didn't do anything bad unless he was confident that an immediate 3♥ would be forcing or that Texas was agreed. An immediate 6NT, or a transfer followed by 6♥, would be ok as well.

 

Opener must bid 3♥ over 3♣. Or maybe pass to give responder a chance to redbl. 3NT is probably the worst possible bid.

[kenrexford]

Ultimately, I'll blame South.  That 3NT call sounds like stuff.  I'm not all that disenchanted with the 3♣ call, but, after 3NT freely, South should probably move to at least 5♥ now.

I think 3NT should be more like

 

♠ KQJx

♥ xx

♦ KQJx

♣ QJx

I think I am missing something. 3♣ was doubled, right? If Opener thought 3♣ was still natural at this point, why not redouble with QJx? For that matter, with QJ? It seems that Opener did realize that 3♣ was a convenient bid made by someone in an undiscussed situation.

 

That being said, it seems to me that 3NT should show fast tricks, with a stopper. Bidding anything shows alternative strains. Passing would suggest uncertainty. So, with KQJ's, I'd pass, for fear of the opponents setting clubs up and then regaining entry with their Ace.

[inquiry]

After 3♣ - X with north playing the hand, it is hard for south to bid the slam. He has exposed his Kx of clubs to a potential lead through to the AQ.. .and the double has asked for that lead.

 

Still, NORTH should have slam ambitions on this auction. His hand could hardly be much better. A third heart, QJ in partners second suit, and a maximum.

 

Worse bid, 3♣, other bad bids.. 2♦ (playing SAYC start with 3♥), 3NT (when are you going to show your heart support to partner? Turns out never), and PASS of 4♥ (I don't think that pass exist). Bidding only 4♥ was "ok" given the double, since the minor suit queens could (and maybe should) be reversed after the double.

 

NOTE: If north uses BLACKWOOD over 4♥ it should be "six-keycard blackwood" looking for the four aces and the kings in both of souths suite (the six keycards). Six keycard blackwood should be used whenever one partner has shown a balanced hand and the other a two suiter. Also note, some people play that a 1NT/2NT OPENER who has limited his hand can never use blackwood.... so 4NT over 4♥ would not be available to them, so they would have to cue-bid 4♠.

[marcD]

if 3H was available to show a slammish hand then the transfer was clearly the worst bid. If not, 3NT stands out by a mile. 3H is clearly called for (3D is fine but could be misinterpreted especially in a casual partnership)

[neilkaz]

In SAYC a direct jump to 3♥ or 3♠ shows a good 6 card+ suit with slam desires. However, from my experiences, I wouldn't expect everyone who says they play SAYC to know that.

 

A direct 3♥ really should solve all the problems here after N cooperates with a 3♠ Q bid.

 

In the given auction, N's 3NT bid is really awful. Support with support !

[kgr]

I was South here.

I didn't bid 4D or 3H first because I wan't sure that It would be interpreted as texas or slamish with heart.

So I started with transfer after which I could only bid 3C,at least my partner can expect a club control now.

After the DBL of 3C and no support from partner I was not enthousiastic anymore to go to 6H.

To most disappointing was not that we missed 6H here, but that partner left because of this.

[Cascade]

I was South here.

I didn't bid 4D or 3H first because I wan't sure that It would be interpreted as texas or slamish with heart.

Fair enough it is a good strategy to avoid bids that partner might not understand even if they are the master bids.

 

So I started with transfer after which I could only bid 3C,at least my partner can expect a club control now.

 

There are other options (5♥) but still fair enough.

 

After the DBL of 3C and no support from partner I was not enthousiastic anymore to go to 6H.

 

I will say it again - fair enough.

 

To most disappointing was not that we missed 6H here, but that partner left because of this.

 

While I can't really know the motives of the person who left it continues to amaze me how a person who has contributed to a problem in a major way explicitly or implicity (as by leaving) tries to blame their partner. I guess that is one of the attractions of our game - you always have someone else to blame.

[the hog]

I was South here.

I didn't bid 4D or 3H first because I wan't sure that It would be interpreted as texas or slamish with heart.

So I started with transfer after which I could only bid 3C,at least my partner can expect a club control now.

After the DBL of 3C and no support from partner I was not enthousiastic anymore to go to 6H.

To most disappointing was not that we missed 6H here, but that partner left because of this.

After which I could only bid 3C???? Really?? What about a quantitative NT bid rather than a non existent suit? I am not surprised your partner left.

[lowerline]

I was South here.

I didn't bid 4D or 3H first because I wan't sure that It would be interpreted as texas or slamish with heart.

So I started with transfer after which I could only bid 3C,at least my partner can expect a club control now.

After the DBL of 3C and no support from partner I was not enthousiastic anymore to go to 6H.

To most disappointing was not that we missed 6H here, but that partner left because of this.

After which I could only bid 3C???? Really?? What about a quantitative NT bid rather than a non existent suit? I am not surprised your partner left.

First, leaving the table like this is rude and there are no excuses for it...

 

Second, I consider 3♣ the worst bid in the sequence. It shows a club suit which you do not have. Bid 4♣ instead. This can't be mistaken for a natural bid since you didn't bid 3♣. If partner cooperates in the cue bidding, you won't have a problem in reaching 6♥.

 

(Note: in Europe it's common to cue second round controls)

 

Steven

[neilkaz]

Perhaps PD was thinking along these lines...

 

"With that monster hand even the cat sitting next to my keyboard would have made a more serious slam try"..."of course I know that a direct jump to 3♥ is slamish with 6+ ♥" ... "I bid 3NT after the double of your 2 card suit (like most, I play that 3♣ shows a 2nd suit) since I wasn't concerned about being set by a ♣ lead, so you should have realized ♣ was not a problem and gone for slam".

... "this is our 3rd missunderstanding, so I think I'll go find someone else to play with for the next few hands"

 

Excuse my sarcasm, but don't be offended when PD leaves.

 

Anyhow, this doesn't excuse PD's 3NT bid with his really good hand for slam after hearing your 3♣ bid.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[sdoty]

I place the blame on both sides, but the bid I hate the most is 3NT.

 

I have some sympathy for starting with a basic transfer and then faking a 3C bid. I think it's obviously bad, but I've been in positions where I seriously doubted that partner would correctly interpret the bid I -wanted- to make... even if it was a 'straightforward' one. At least you can feel confident that 3C is forcing.

 

4H seems too conservative, but if you didn't trust partner to handle any of the other possible bids over 2H correctly, I can see how after 3NT it would feel like a "4H or 6H?" shot in the dark.

 

I can't, however, muster any sympathy for the 3NT bid. How could 3H over 3C possibly be misinterpreted? (okay -- your regular partner might infer that you don't have a diamond control, but worrying about that with a pick-up seems silly. and it still doesn't make 3NT make any sense.) :)

 

Susan

[Gerben42]

I wouldn't dare 1N - 3♥ or similar, and also won't count on partner realizing that 1N - 2♦ - 2♥ - 4♥ is a slam try which in my opinion is the right way to approach the hand: Partner I am very strong but I lack controls, do you have some? 3NT is the worst bid of the sequence.

[frouu]

I agree with Gerben42. If partnership uses both texas & jacoby transfers, with 6 hearts; use jacoby for slam try, texas for sign off at 4♥. i.e: 1NT/2♦/2♥/4♥ is slam try while 1NT/4♦/4♥ is sign-off.