Strangely Confusing #1

[kenrexford]

The auction started 1NT (14+ to 17-) -P- 4♥(Texas Transfer) -P- 4♠ -P- 4NT (RKCB) -P- 5♥(2, no trump Q) -P- 5NT(Grand Try) -P- 6♣(Club King -- specific kings played)..

 

...side point -- this was apparently not recognized as a semi-rejection...

 

-P- 6♦???

 

Now, I was of the understanding that with the agreement to play "specific Kings," this 6♦ was an asking bid, asking for the diamond King (if you have this, bid the grand). Without the diamond king, you would bid 6♠, or 6♥ to show the heart King (without the diamond King -- with all three you'd have bid the grand over 5NT).

 

This treatment/understanding was apparently not well agreed, as no one polled (all professionals, some with 20K+ masterpoints) knew whether 6♦ asked or told.

 

Is this sequence that unusual and apparently undecided without specific agreements? Is there a "standard?"

 

The hands were ♠Kxx ♥J10x ♦K10xx ♣AKx opposite ♠AQJ10xx ♥AQxx ♦Ax ♣x. (As an aside, I'm not sure that 6♦ makes sense with either meaning, but Responder felt that he needed to know about the heart card such that 6♦ "gave room" to Opener.)

[jdonn]

I'll admit it, I also thought it was standard that 6♦ asks for the diamond king, or lets opener show the heart king. On the actual hand I would bid 6♥ as responder to show I only want that king, not the diamond king.

 

If responder didn't particularly want either king for a grand, but just bid 5NT to allow opener to bid a grand with a lot of tricks, then he would bid 6♠ over 6♣.

[Guest Jlall]

I play bids as showing not asking when there are 2 available, and when there's 1 available its just a generic noise "please bid grand if you have extras in context of this auction."

 

This will sound funny but I think the problem on this hand was responder just blasting into keycard. He didn't know enough. He should have gone slower and attempted some cuebidding so he had information about the red suits and also how many spades partner had before going into blackwood. Even if responder simply signs off over 6C there is no way to get to 7 opposite Kxx Kx Jxxx AKxx and not opposite Kxx Jxx Kxx AKxx.

[pclayton]

I sort of play it like Justin. The suit below ours is "Last Train" - which says "we have all of the keys and trump Q, but I can't count 13 tricks. Your side King is useful, but it isn't enough".

 

If its our trump suit minus 2+, then it needs a control in the given suit. A stiff is enough.

 

A direct 6 bid over the key card response looks for 3rd round control.

[jdonn]

I'll consolidate

 

Even if responder simply signs off over 6C there is no way to get to 7 opposite Kxx Kx Jxxx AKxx and not opposite Kxx Jxx Kxx AKxx.

I showed you the way. Well ok I can't do it if it's not standard but I really thought it was. My way (and Ken's!) still makes more sense to me, why are we asking partner questions then showing him something (unless I'm misunderstanding), shouldn't we just keep asking more questions to find out what we need? We are the captain, and partner is the crew, no? ;)

 

I sort of play it like Justin. The suit below ours is "Last Train" - which says "we have all of the keys and trump Q, but I can't count 13 tricks. Your side King is useful, but it isn't enough".

Justin said the same thing, but isn't that what signing off in the trump suit is? It shows all the keycards but says we need more to bid a grand slam. I don't see why we need another bid for this, it's a lot more comfortable to be able to count your specific tricks for a grand when possible instead of just asking partner 'do you think we have a grand'.

 

At least I'm glad to find out it's not nearly as standard as I thought, so I won't go busting it out with random people.

[Apollo81]

I'll admit it, I also thought it was standard that 6♦ asks for the diamond king, or lets opener show the heart king. On the actual hand I would bid 6♥ as responder to show I only want that king, not the diamond king.

 

If responder didn't particularly want either king for a grand, but just bid 5NT to allow opener to bid a grand with a lot of tricks, then he would bid 6♠ over 6♣.

agree

[kenrexford]

Justin has a good point that I raised at the table. Because we use 1NT-P-2♣-P-2♦-P-4♥ as Texas, the actual auction makes little sense. Equally, if a Jacoby Transfer, then 3OM, is GF and establishes trumps, this is a better auction.

 

That being said, I do not get the logic to the "showing" theory. If Responder needs the heart King, he apparently "shows" a false diamond King, eh? Apparently he instead would "show" a false heart King if he needed the diamond King?

 

If by "showing," Responder is "showing" a slow winner (a queen) that needs support (the King), then this seems like saying the same thing in a convoluted manner.

 

I somewhat get the LTTC concept, when only one bid is available, except that not bidding the slam after 5NT directly seems to have already answered that question. It seems more plausible that the specific and unshown King would be more likely the issue. For instance, had I bid 5♦, showing the diamond King but denying the club King and denying a straight acceptance of 5NT, the two styles would be 5♥ asking for the heart King, a card I have not been able to show, and 5♥ asking for something unworthy of a direct grand bid but worthy of a delayed grand bid, which seems quite esoteric.

 

On the other hand, if two kings would be contextually maximum or would be contextually sufficient, but a K-Q combo not enough, then this might make some sense.

[SoTired]

I have seen the 6D bid described in 3 different places as asking for the ♦K for grand. In one of Mike Lawrence's book (I only saw an extract so I don't know which one); in Washington Standard, and on Kaplan's website before he turned it into a book.

 

So on this hand, 4N'er should have bid 6H, asking for the ♥K for grand, not the ♦K. And the replies to the grand-slam-king-ask (anyone else got a good name for it?)

6-trump = no 2nd round control

7-trump = singleton in asking suit

6N = ask-K

7-ask = ask-KQ

[pclayton]

Justin said the same thing, but isn't that what signing off in the trump suit is? It shows all the keycards but says we need more to bid a grand slam. I don't see why we need another bid for this, it's a lot more comfortable to be able to count your specific tricks for a grand when possible instead of just asking partner 'do you think we have a grand'.

 

No I think Last Train conveys a different message. I think there's three shades of gray here:

 

5N initially says "We have all of the keys". There's no inference of how strong the 5N bidder is. Responder can grab the reins and bid 7, or respond with a K.

 

A signoff (..5N - 6♦ - 6♠) says I have no extras, and merely confirms that 5N showed all the keys, but nothing more interesting. I suppose responder could still bid a grand here. Last Train certainly helps with the 'hesitation signoff' problem here.

 

Last Train (...5N - 6♣ - 6♥) confirms extras, and maybe a hidden goodie, but can't count 13 tricks.

[Guest Jlall]

I'll consolidate

 

Even if responder simply signs off over 6C there is no way to get to 7 opposite Kxx Kx Jxxx AKxx and not opposite Kxx Jxx Kxx AKxx.

I showed you the way. Well ok I can't do it if it's not standard but I really thought it was.

Fine then you will get to a grand opposite Kx Kxx Jxx AKxx as well using your way. My basic point was that once blackwood was bid so hastily you can't do it all with any method.

[jdonn]

Fine then you will get to a grand opposite Kx Kxx Jxx AKxx as well using your way. My basic point was that once blackwood was bid so hastily you can't do it all with any method.

I wasn't advocating the keycard bid, though I do think it's reasonable. It's only opposite this exact shape (and opener not having heart jack) that the grand isn't so good, 2-2 or 2-4 or 3-x in the majors would all be ok, and I don't see how to find out opener is 2-4 or 2-2 but not 2-3 in the majors.

 

Anyway it has nothing to do with the methods. What if responder was AQJx of hearts? I don't think Jacoby and splinter would get a cuebid on Kx Kxx Jxxx AKxx since he has a minimum, doubleton spade, and wasted king. Your point is true that we can't do it all after blackwood, but we can't do it all a slower way either.

[jdonn]

Justin said the same thing, but isn't that what signing off in the trump suit is? It shows all the keycards but says we need more to bid a grand slam. I don't see why we need another bid for this, it's a lot more comfortable to be able to count your specific tricks for a grand when possible instead of just asking partner 'do you think we have a grand'.

 

No I think Last Train conveys a different message. I think there's three shades of gray here:

 

5N initially says "We have all of the keys". There's no inference of how strong the 5N bidder is. Responder can grab the reins and bid 7, or respond with a K.

 

A signoff (..5N - 6♦ - 6♠) says I have no extras, and merely confirms that 5N showed all the keys, but nothing more interesting. I suppose responder could still bid a grand here. Last Train certainly helps with the 'hesitation signoff' problem here.

 

Last Train (...5N - 6♣ - 6♥) confirms extras, and maybe a hidden goodie, but can't count 13 tricks.

If you have this extras with a hidden goodie, surely you can find out if you have a grand through an asking 6♦ or 6♥ bid? I can't see at all what your method is gaining you.

 

You avoid the hesitation signoff problem by doing your tank before 5NT to plan for the responses, as I'm sure you already knew.