How would you bid this?

[Mr. Dodgy]

[hv=d=w&v=n&w=sjt9ha63d8432ckj3&e=sakq8hkqj75dcaq86]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Can you get to the grand?

 

If the auction starts Pass-2♣!-2NT-3♥-4♥, is 5♦ EKCB?

 

 

Thanks,

 

Justin.

[vang]

i don't think 5♦ is ekcbw unless specifically discussed. isn't easier to assume cuebids and continue with 4♠ - 5♣ - 5NT etc ?

[skjaeran]

i don't think 5♦ is ekcbw unless specifically discussed. isn't easier to assume cuebids and continue with 4♠ - 5♣ - 5NT etc ?

Why should responder raise 3♥ to 4♥ instead of making a cuebid in ♣'s, after which 5♦ WOULD be EKB.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would say playing SAYC or 2/1 one should start

with 1H, it simplifies the auction in case partner does

not hold 3 card heart support.

Playing 2/1 partner wont pass with 4HCP and 3hearts, i.e.

if partner passes you wont miss game often.

 

The following auction seems reasonable, although I did

construct the auction a bit.

 

1H - 2H (1)

2S (2) - 3C (3)

5D (4) - 5S (4)

7H

 

(1) constructive raise

(2) trial bid, values

(3) values, not min, but also not max.,

one can argue, that responder can bid 4H

direct, but even if responder drives to game,

a 3C bid makes sense

(4) since opener "sees" the King of clubs, he knows 6H

are more or less cold, and using EKCB he can check

for 7

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[skjaeran]

I'd not open this hand 2♣.

 

Our bidding would be:

P - 1♥

2♦ - 2♠

3♣ - 5♦

5♠ - 7♥

 

2♦=3c Drury

2♠="nat" GF

3♣=values

5♦=EKB

[helene_t]

pass-1♥

2♥-5♦

5♠-5NT

6♣-7♥

[mikeh]

I don't think it is realistic to bid this grand. We need to be sure of no club losers and no spade losers..... how on earth can we assume that partner can take car of both suits?

 

Bear in mind we are void in diamonds, so most of the time partner has some length there.. but if we discover he has only 3 trumps.... we can't assume we can ruff even one black suit, let alone both.

 

I think Harald's 3 card drury sequence is as close as one can get... and 7♥ is just a blind stab on that auction. Heck, opposite xxx Axx KJxx Kxx, a much clearer drury than the 4333 9 count we actually hold, grand is well below par.

 

As for exclusion keycard... after a single raise...all I can say is 'wow'. I'd have to be on the luckiest streak of my life to make that call :) My partners hold xxx xxx KQJxx xx

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

As for exclusion keycard... after a single raise...all I can say is 'wow'. I'd have to be on the luckiest streak of my life to make that call :) My partners hold xxx xxx KQJxx xx

Hi Mike,

 

is this hand worth a constructive raise?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: But I am glad, you said, that the grand

cant be bid with 100% convidence, because

I believe, I would only reach 6H with my

standard partner.

And I feared, that the reason was, that we

dont play EKCB, but it is reasurring that bidding

7H is hard even if EKCB was available.

[jdonn]

1♥ 2♥

3♣ 4♥

4♠ 5♣

5NT 6-whatever shows 1 heart honor for you

6♠ 7♥

 

It seems to me that whatever 6♠ means it's the right bid. If partner finds it in him to raise you know that's right, if partner bids 7♣ you know that's right, and if partner doesn't understand what you are doing he will bid 7♥ which should range from cold to at least having play. I would be confident enough to count on the grand making in some suit in order to bid 5NT. For example if partner has neither jack but 2-4 or 4-2 in the black suits, 7 is easy in that suit. If partner is 2-3 either way in the black suits, 7 is easy in hearts. Finding partner 3343 with no black jacks is real pessimistic thinking, and on Mike's example hand partner would bid 3♦ over 3♣ on this auction.

[kenrexford]

There seem to be lots of alternative methods to bid this. Given the parameters of agreements up to the 4♥ call, I would think that 5♦ should be Exclusion, personally, as I cannot imagine forcing slam without a spade or club control as the 2♣ opener. The response will be 5♠ (one key), in which case 6♣ should focus things relatively well.

 

That being said, more modern bidding might have helped. I would also open 2♣, despite the strategic gains from a 1♥ opening, because this hand is way too powerful, IMO. Assuming that start:

 

2♣ (strong forcing artificial)

2♦ (GF and waiting)

2♥ (Kokish)

2♠ (forced)

3♣ (second suit, 5+ hearts)

3♥ (heart support)

3♠ (spade control)

4♣ (contextually non-serious, club A/K/Q)

4♦ (Last Train -- implies need of a diamond control)

4♥ (ain't got a diamond control)

4NT (1430 RKCB -- not the "exclusion" effect)

5♣ (One Key Card)

5♦ (heart Queen or extra length?)

5♥ (no)

 

Opener will now expect Responder to have the heart Ace but not five hearts, the club King, and no Ace or King of diamonds but 2+ diamonds. If that is enough for Opener to move, he goes. If he needs more info, Opener can bid 6♦, grand slam last train, asking for something more (the 4♦ call earlier prepped that), and the undisclosed club Jack should be enticing as other calls might have asked for other things.

 

Had Opener started 1♥, the bidding I would use:

 

1♥ (natural)

2♥ (fit)

3♣ (natural GT or slam start)

4♥ (accepts game try, no side controls to show, not 4+ clubs)

4NT (note "exclusion" effect, again)

5♣ (One Key Card -- 1430)

 

This results in the same essential finish.

[mikeh]

<snip>

As for exclusion keycard... after a single raise...all I can say is 'wow'. I'd have to be on the luckiest streak of my life to make that call :) My partners hold xxx xxx KQJxx xx

Hi Mike,

 

is this hand worth a constructive raise?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: But I am glad, you said, that the grand

cant be bid with 100% convidence, because

I believe, I would only reach 6H with my

standard partner.

And I feared, that the reason was, that we

dont play EKCB, but it is reasurring that bidding

7H is hard even if EKCB was available.

I don't know many who play constructive raises by passed hands. In any event, my construction was definitely 'glass half empty' :) Certainly, one tries for slam opposite a single raise and should try for grand opposite drury.

[mikeh]

1♥ 2♥

3♣ 4♥

4♠ 5♣

5NT 6-whatever shows 1 heart honor for you

6♠ 7♥

 

It seems to me that whatever 6♠ means it's the right bid. If partner finds it in him to raise you know that's right, if partner bids 7♣ you know that's right, and if partner doesn't understand what you are doing he will bid 7♥ which should range from cold to at least having play. I would be confident enough to count on the grand making in some suit in order to bid 5NT. For example if partner has neither jack but 2-4 or 4-2 in the black suits, 7 is easy in that suit. If partner is 2-3 either way in the black suits, 7 is easy in hearts. Finding partner 3343 with no black jacks is real pessimistic thinking, and on Mike's example hand partner would bid 3♦ over 3♣ on this auction.

I really, really don't see this at all.

 

I like everything up to the 6♠ bid, but it is wrong, in principle, to think that we have 7♣ as a fallback position.

 

Kxxx in clubs makes for a poor grand: we need clubs 3-2 to have a play.

 

KJxx is far better, of course, but maybe with Axx KJxx in ♥/♣, an expert partner would bid 4♣ over 3♣. Surely he would/should?

 

In threads some time ago, the consensus appeared to be that responder should bid a concentration of values 'along the way' if he was accepting a help suit game try, in case it was actually a slam try.. which this clearly was.

 

So when we are about to bid 6♠, we may as well bid 7♥ because partner cannot have a hand that makes 7♣ (rather than 7♥) unless he has misbid earlier).

 

And if we give partner Kxx in clubs or even KJx in clubs, or even Kx in clubs, we still have a spade issue.

 

While I agree that giving partner no help in either black suit is pessimistic, assuming he helps BOTH is wild-eyed optimism.

[helene_t]

I think Mikeh is right. I was probably just resulting.

[mike777]

tough even playing constructive raises by a passed hand as I do and short suit game tries.

 

p=1h

2h!=2s!

2nt!=3d!

4H!=4s!?

5c!=5s!

6c!?=?

 

2h=8-11 support points, only 3 Hearts

2s=start of short suit game try

2nt=forced

3d=short suit

4h=no wastage

4s= rkc ok here with a void after short suit game try? Partner knows we got some unusual hand to try for slam?

5c=one

5s=grand try

6c= would you just show k of clubs or would you just jump to 7H now? (You passed and partner is trying for a Grand knowing you will NEVER have 11 hcp here). :P

Now what?

[jdonn]

1♥ 2♥

3♣ 4♥

4♠ 5♣

5NT 6-whatever shows 1 heart honor for you

6♠ 7♥

 

It seems to me that whatever 6♠ means it's the right bid. If partner finds it in him to raise you know that's right, if partner bids 7♣ you know that's right, and if partner doesn't understand what you are doing he will bid 7♥ which should range from cold to at least having play. I would be confident enough to count on the grand making in some suit in order to bid 5NT. For example if partner has neither jack but 2-4 or 4-2 in the black suits, 7 is easy in that suit. If partner is 2-3 either way in the black suits, 7 is easy in hearts. Finding partner 3343 with no black jacks is real pessimistic thinking, and on Mike's example hand partner would bid 3♦ over 3♣ on this auction.

I really, really don't see this at all.

 

I like everything up to the 6♠ bid, but it is wrong, in principle, to think that we have 7♣ as a fallback position.

 

Kxxx in clubs makes for a poor grand: we need clubs 3-2 to have a play.

 

KJxx is far better, of course, but maybe with Axx KJxx in ♥/♣, an expert partner would bid 4♣ over 3♣. Surely he would/should?

 

In threads some time ago, the consensus appeared to be that responder should bid a concentration of values 'along the way' if he was accepting a help suit game try, in case it was actually a slam try.. which this clearly was.

 

So when we are about to bid 6♠, we may as well bid 7♥ because partner cannot have a hand that makes 7♣ (rather than 7♥) unless he has misbid earlier).

 

And if we give partner Kxx in clubs or even KJx in clubs, or even Kx in clubs, we still have a spade issue.

 

While I agree that giving partner no help in either black suit is pessimistic, assuming he helps BOTH is wild-eyed optimism.

My points about what you said:

 

- I agree with you that it's unlikely partner has KJxx of clubs, but firstly I would not raise 3♣ with exactly xxx Axx xxx KJxx as it seems too encouraging to me with such terrible shape (at that point), second KTxx of clubs would make for more than a good enough grand and Kxxx is barely adequate, and third how could it hurt? In other words even if partner rarely can bid 7♣, when he does he will be right, and giving him the chance loses nothing.

- There is no need to greatly exagerate (wild eyed optimism?) to make your point (although I confess, it's very effective writing.) If you think that assuming partner has any amount of cards but 3 in either black suit and the jack of the other, or simply 4 in either black suit to make a grand cold in that suit - so in other words anything but 3-3 in those suits (and even then the grand could be cold as in the actual hand), well if you think that is wild eyed optimism, I just don't agree. It seems to me like the vast majority of hands.

[mikeh]

Anyone who thinks that partner will EVER raise 6♠ to 7♠ can hardly complain about being accused of being wildly optimistic.

 

Partner will be scratching his head, cursing you under his breath, but will NOT raise to 7♠ on Jxxx...unless he's read your post first B) His problem will be not only that he knows he is guessing, but he also knows that 7♠ is unrecoverable when wrong.

 

So this eliminates many of the hands that you rely upon to make this bid workable.

 

And as for not bidding 4♣ on xxx Axx xxx KJxx... why not? Could we have a better hand for our 2♥ raise, now that partner bid 3♣? Yes, we could have Jxx Axx xxx KJxx, I suppose B)

 

Anyway, thanks for the compliment on my writing style :)

[jdonn]

Anyone who thinks that partner will EVER raise 6♠ to 7♠ can hardly complain about being accused of being wildly optimistic.

 

Partner will be scratching his head, cursing you under his breath, but will NOT raise to 7♠ on Jxxx...unless he's read your post first :) His problem will be not only that he knows he is guessing, but he also knows that 7♠ is unrecoverable when wrong.

 

So this eliminates many of the hands that you rely upon to make this bid workable.

 

And as for not bidding 4♣ on xxx Axx xxx KJxx... why not? Could we have a better hand for our 2♥ raise, now that partner bid 3♣? Yes, we could have Jxx Axx xxx KJxx, I suppose B)

 

Anyway, thanks for the compliment on my writing style :)

Well knowing he has the heart ace and club king, and that you forced to a grand without checking at all on his spade holding, exactly what do you think partner will be playing you for in spades B)

 

As for better hands than xxx Axx xxx KJxx

xxx Axxx xx KJxx

xx Axx xxx KJxxx

xxx Axx xxx KQxx

I do not doubt a lot of players would raise 3♣ to 4♣ on the hand we mention here. But I wouldn't! Well, I think I wouldn't, or maybe I myself am guilty of clouded judgment based on the argument I was trying to make B)

 

And yes, your writing is excellent. It puts me to shame, in fact it makes me all wild-eyed with jealousy.

[mikeh]

And yes, your writing is excellent. It puts me to shame, in fact it makes me all wild-eyed with jealousy.

love it B) B) :)

[Fluffy]

If anyone cares this is mine:

 

1♥-2♥

4♦-5♣

5NT-6♦

7♥

[kenrexford]

For the jdonn-mikeh discussion:

 

If your raise is constructive, an idea that I'd suggest that you consider 3NT as a serious raise of the new suit, showing 3-4 cover cards. If not constructive, 2-3 cover cards. Always with 4-card support for the second suit.

 

This allows space for a 4♣ call agreeing the second suit for slam purposes (the 4-4 ot 5-4 better than the 5-3, perhaps) and asking for more info. Responder "signs off" in the agreed first suit (or hearts if 4-4 heart fit found) with the minimum number of controls, cues a side hesitant control (king), other with max controls.

 

On this hand, suppose Responder had KJxx in clubs, not playing constructive raises:

 

1♥ (5+ hearts)

2♥ (fit)

3♣ (natural G.T. or slam try)

3NT (fit, 4-piece support for second suit, 2-3 covers)

4♣ (how many covers?)

4♥ (minimum number -- two)

 

That's about all Opener needs to know for a reasonable grand slam bid. However, if interested in more info, Opener could always bid 4NT to ask if Responder holds anything more of interest and find out about the club Jack (for the chickens).

 

When clubs are the second suit, this is not as obvious a problem and solution. But, make Opener's hand a little bit lighter and change the clubs to the diamonds in both hands (adding the fourth club), and you see the problem with a 4♦ raise.

 

A direct raise of the suit (instead of 3NT) shows a fifth card in that suit and the same holding (2-3 or 3-4 covers, depending upon the initial start), except that, if the new suit is hearts, the direct bid of 4♥ is weaker than 3NT and simply suggests a wing-and-prayer second-suit try.

[mikeh]

Hey... whaddya know... I like Ken's idea of the use of 3N. I don't think I agree with the cover card aspect, but I do like the idea of 3N showing a slam-suitable hand with precisely 4 trump, leaving the raise to show the same hand with 5+.

 

I have never liked hearing a 'natural' 3N after my hsgt's, since my hsgt's are NEVER aimed at 3N. So inventing an artificial use for it serves two purposes: 1: it is good for the occasional slam hand and 2: it stops partners from bidding 3N to play.

 

BTW, I don't think it matters whether you play constructive: partner should certainly never move beyond 3M unless he has a hand that, in context, is or has become at least constructive. Plus, I will not willingly play constructive raises by a passed hand.

[kenrexford]

Hey... whaddya know... I like Ken's idea...

Will wonders never cease? :rolleyes:

 

As an enticement, somesider the following basic layout:

 

♠AQJxx ♥KJxx ♦??? ♣???

♠Kxx ♥AQxx ♦??? ♣???

 

In 4♠, you can count nine tricks without touching the minors yet, on the basis of only 20 HCP's. In 4♥, assuming one ruff in Opener's hand, you get to 10 tricks on the same cards. Add a heart to dummy, and you get to 11 tricks, in hearts, on the same 20 points.

 

Now, add in a stiff and an Ace:

 

♠AQJxx ♥KJxx ♦Axx ♣x

♠Kxx ♥AQxx ♦xxx ♣xxx

 

With 24 HCP's, you get to 10 tricks with spades as trumps. With hearts as trumps, you get to 11 easily, 12 if Responder has a fifth heart. Opener's 15 HCP's could easily be 18, with the diamond King, eh? But, even without that, a possible nine-card secondary fit makes for 12 tricks on 24 HCP's, and the Jacks might be fluff (especially the spade Jack).

 

Adding in distribution, you get to a grand total of 28(26/27), and yet slam is great with the fifth heart.

 

LTC? Opener has 6, Responder has (with the fifth heart) 8. 24-6-8=10. Strange...

 

Same thing happens when you add in the extra King of diamonds instead.

[Mr. Dodgy]

Thanks for all the replies :)

 

Bonus Question: How do you feel about a start like this...

 

2♦*-2♥**-3♣***...

 

*Multi: weak 6-card Major OR 20-21 balanced (theoretically some other VERY big balanced hands also start with 2♦) OR 21+ 3-suited.

**Pass-or-Correct. Denies (9)10+ HCP.

***21+ 3-suited, short in ♦s or ♠s.

 

Strictly speaking the opener should be 4441, not 5440. Continuations are not terribly well defined, general principle is that responder will bid paradoxically (short/bad suits) and opener natural, so 3♠ by responder then is probably next (implies at least tolerance for ♥s I suppose).

 

Go on, laugh if you want, I did.