Fat-free grand

[sathyab]

What is a fat-free grand you might ask ? Two 5-3 fits with a combined 150 honors in both, two Aces and a King in the other suits. We got there, but being a first time partnership, the bidding sequences wasn't very convincing. How'd other bid it ?

 

[hv=d=n&v=e&n=sk762hjt3daktcat9&w=sj4h652d93ckqj754&e=sq983h74d876c8632&s=sat5hakq98dqj542c]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Opponents being vulnerable, the ony interference you might get is a double over a possible 5c bid by South.

[hrothgar]

Here's one possibility

 

1N - 2♦

2♥ - 3♦

3♥ - 3♠

 

After 3♠, the NT opener knows that responder holds slam invitational values with:

 

5+ Hearts

either 5+ Diamonds or 4+ Diamonds (depends on agreements)

The Ace of Spades

 

The NT opening has a 15 count and 4=3=3=3 shape, but all of his points are in Aces and Kings. The one Jack that he has is the JTx opposite responder's primary suit.

 

This would be a great hand for 6 ace keycard, since that will let you focus on what the NT bidder really cares about: The three top hearts and the Queen of Diamonds.

 

Absent 6 Ace keycard, I think that you might have trouble:

 

North will cue bid 4♣, South will bid 4♦ LTTC... Now what?

[pclayton]

I think its reachable from the North side, but its simpler if South starts:

 

1H - 1S

2D - 3H (yes, forcing)

3N - 4S (3N is a serious spade cue, 4S is key card)

6C - 7H (6C = odd # of keys and a club void)

 

From the North:

 

1N - 2♦

2♥ - 3♣ (diamonds)

3♥ - 3N - again - spade cue

4S - 6♣

7♥

[hrothgar]

I think its reachable from the North side, but its simpler if South starts:

 

1H - 1S

2D - 3H (yes, forcing)

3N - 4S (3N is a serious spade cue, 4S is key card)

6C - 7H (6C = odd # of keys and a club void)

 

From the North:

 

1N - 2♦

2♥ - 3♣ (diamonds)

3♥ - 3N  - again - spade cue

4S - 6♣

7♥

Uh....

 

How would either of these sequences differ is South was missing a red Queen?

 

Also, on your first sequence where South opens:

 

Are you really advocating a 2♦ rebid by South?

[pclayton]

If south opens, what else would you advocate as a rebid over 1S? 2S? 3D?

 

I agree with your comment about the red queens. North is out of room to make a trump queen over 6♣ unfortunately.

[hrothgar]

If south opens, what else would you advocate as a rebid over 1S? 2S? 3D?

I think that 2♦ and 3♦ are both flawed, but I think that I rather die as a lion than an lamb...

 

(The 3 card Spade support makes me prefer 3♦)

[kenrexford]

This is a tough problem, because Responder wants to do two things -- ask about diamonds AND exclude clubs. A normal cuebidding sequence will not exchange enough information to resolve that problem.

 

As it works out, 5♦ as RKCB, but with the diamond King and Queen as the key cards, works well. North has nice cards, but not enough to super-accept or to show serious interest.

 

One auction might be as follows, though:

 

1NT

2♦

2♥

3♦

3♥ (not

3♠ (1st/2nd control)

4♣ (non-serious, club Ace or King)

4♦ (LTTC)

4♠ (spade Ace or King, acceptance considering)

5♦ (1430 RKCB, but diamonds as minor keys)

5♠ (three)

7♥

 

The problem with this auction is that it does not assist Responder when Opener lacks the club Ace but has the spade Queen. Something like ♠KQx ♥J10x ♦AKx ♣Kxxx. Opener's response to 5♦ would be 5NT, which preempts ability to check on the spade value AND does not state whether the club was one of the two keys.

 

So, how about Exclusion?

 

1NT

2♦

2♥

3♦

3♥ (not

3♠ (1st/2nd control)

4♣ (non-serious, club Ace or King)

4♦ (LTTC)

4♠ (spade Ace or King, acceptance considering)

5♣ (Exclusion 1430)

5♦ (1)

 

At this point, Responder wants to know if Opener has the diamond King and either the spade Queen or the club Ace, but that seems to difficult to ask, at least as to both questions.

 

A possible solution is if Opener uses "de-nebulizing" cuebids here. The idea is for a 1NT opener to only cuebid a minor as his first cuebid of a minor if he has two of the top three cards in that minor. The same is used after 2NT openings or after a Nebulous Diamond opening. Whereas strict application of that idea works well here, application to reach a minor bid by Responder naturally seems like a bit of a stretch.

 

Thus, these hands seem difficult to bid. There are forks-in-the-road decisions that can be made that are fortuitous, but equally reasonable alernatives that happen to not work well. I'd get to 7♥ on a fortunate day but stop at 6♥ on the next.

[ArtK78]

Funny thing is that you want to get to 7NT at any form of scoring. So far the posters have found ways to get to 7♥, but no one has found a way to get to 7NT, the safest and highest-scoring contract.

 

Is it impossible?

[hrothgar]

Funny thing is that you want to get to 7NT at any form of scoring. So far the posters have found ways to get to 7♥, but no one has found a way to get to 7NT, the safest and highest-scoring contract.

 

Is it impossible?

I think it depends on who is driving:

 

I proposed a couple sequences based on the balanced hand asking. The balanced hand holds the Ace of Clubs. If he ends up setting the contract, he'd have the option of bidding 7NT.

 

If the unbalanced hand is asking, you'll probably go through an exclusion sequence, in which case...

[jdonn]

Funny thing is that you want to get to 7NT at any form of scoring.  So far the posters have found ways to get to 7♥, but no one has found a way to get to 7NT, the safest and highest-scoring contract.

 

Is it impossible?

1NT 2♦

2♥ 3♦ (or 3♣ which I sometimes play)

3♥ 4♣ (shortness)

4♦ 4♠

5♣ 6♣

6♦ 7♥

7NT

 

Might be biased, you be the judge. But if you believe it through 7♥ then north can certainly convert, he knows the spade king is likely the 13th trick. I still only would at mps though, maybe partner has Axx AKQxxx Qxxx -? South might not introduce the diamonds on that hand but not sure I want to take the chance.

 

On this start (through 3♥) exclusion would clearly be wrong, north could have much more strength in the black suits and be off AK of diamonds. There are probably other potential auctions where it would work better.

[hrothgar]

Funny thing is that you want to get to 7NT at any form of scoring.  So far the posters have found ways to get to 7♥, but no one has found a way to get to 7NT, the safest and highest-scoring contract.

 

Is it impossible?

1NT 2♦

2♥ 3♦ (or 3♣ which I sometimes play)

3♥ 4♣ (shortness)

4♦ 4♠

5♣ 6♣

6♦ 7♥

7NT

 

Might be biased, you be the judge. But if you believe it through 7♥ then north can certainly convert, he knows the spade king is likely the 13th trick. I still only would at mps though, maybe partner has Axx AKQxxx Qxxx -? South might not introduce the diamonds on that hand but not sure I want to take the chance.

A few quick questions about the 4♣ bid:

 

Do you have an explict agreement that the shapely hand will show his shortage in this sequence? For example, would a 3♠ bid have shown Spade shortness?

 

Also, does the cue bid explictly promise a void or could it be made on a singleton?

 

Last but not least, do you have any explict meaning assigned to 4♦?

 

I'm certainly not criticizing the methods, however, I'm not used to this set of agreements and don't really understand the full ramifications of this choice of methods.

[jdonn]

A few quick questions about the 4♣ bid:

 

Do you have an explict agreement that the shapely hand will show his shortage in this sequence?  For example, would a 3♠ bid have shown Spade shortness?

Yes, there was a recent discussion in another thread in fact about this method, advocated by Kokish (I'm certainly not a fan of everything he likes, but in this case I am.) My normal style is to show shape on my third bid here (natural 3♠ on this auction is what I would have bid in the past) but there are many auctions where a player shows two suits and it works well to have the third bid be shortness. This avoids the guilty feelings of having to make a 'natural' bid in xx or xxx type suits.

 

I firmly believe it's much more useful for responder to continue to show his shape in some fashion than cuebid. You could have a very similar auction after a natural 3♠ on the third bid as well. There is a case for not playing the shortness showing method when either of the suits is below 3NT.

 

Also, does the cue bid explictly promise a void or could it be made on a singleton?

Could be singleton.

 

Last but not least, do you have any explict meaning assigned to 4♦?

To me it's just a cuebid. You can certainly play it as last train and have reasonable auctions though.

[Fluffy]

My best try:

 

1NT -2♦ 15-17 - forces 2♥

2♥-2♠ forced - 5M-4m 3-1 or alike

2NT-3♦ forced - 4♦ + club shortness

3♥-4♣ asks major - 5♥ + club first round, has to have 10th red card somewhere since ♣A is on north

4♥-4♠ natural - cue

4NT-5♦ blackwood - 4 key cards

5♠-5NT ♥Q?-yes but no king

6♦-6♠ what in diamonds?-♦Q

 

 

7♥ because ♦J is unknown, and on a good day you can ruff a diamond in hand. 7NT at MPs.

 

EDIT, Could try 7♣ after 6♠ looking for best 7, might get us to 7NT but hard to tell

[sathyab]

Funny thing is that you want to get to 7NT at any form of scoring.  So far the posters have found ways to get to 7♥, but no one has found a way to get to 7NT, the safest and highest-scoring contract.

 

Is it impossible?

1NT 2♦

2♥ 3♦ (or 3♣ which I sometimes play)

3♥ 4♣ (shortness)

4♦ 4♠

5♣ 6♣

6♦ 7♥

7NT

 

Might be biased, you be the judge. But if you believe it through 7♥ then north can certainly convert, he knows the spade king is likely the 13th trick. I still only would at mps though, maybe partner has Axx AKQxxx Qxxx -? South might not introduce the diamonds on that hand but not sure I want to take the chance.

A few quick questions about the 4♣ bid:

 

Do you have an explict agreement that the shapely hand will show his shortage in this sequence? For example, would a 3♠ bid have shown Spade shortness?

 

Also, does the cue bid explictly promise a void or could it be made on a singleton?

 

Last but not least, do you have any explict meaning assigned to 4♦?

 

I'm certainly not criticizing the methods, however, I'm not used to this set of agreements and don't really understand the full ramifications of this choice of methods.

1nt 2d

2h 3d

3h 4c ?

 

I was thinking about that 4c bid too. Why 4c bid instead of the space-saving cue-bid of 3s until I saw the explantion.

 

At the table I bid 3s over 3d, which was a spade cue-bid in support of Diamonds, inferentially preferring Diamonds to Hearts. Naturally I hadn't anticipated subsequent developments which worked out really well on this pair of hands, but I just felt that it was more important to show my Diamond support with two top honors rather than heart preference with JTx. Over 3s pd bid 5c, X by RHO. Not having discussed responses to exclusion in detail, let alone intervention over it, I bid 5d which I hoped he'd take as showing two keys outside clubs (ROPI, so XX and Pass would be the first two steps I hoped). Partner probably placing me with the King of Spades, AK of Diamonds, bid 7d ! Once he bid 7d, I had no trouble constructing the hand he was actually dealt, solid hearts and the Ace of Spades in addition of QJxxx of Diamonds. So I "corrected" it to 7nt !

[kenrexford]

Funny thing is that you want to get to 7NT at any form of scoring. So far the posters have found ways to get to 7♥, but no one has found a way to get to 7NT, the safest and highest-scoring contract.

 

Is it impossible?

I think that 7♦ might be the best contract from Responder's perspective, actually. A void is less likely than a troubling split of 4-1. Suppose you are in 7♦. You win the lead and play two top diamonds, retaining one with Opener's hand. If diamonds split 3-2, you then play two rounds of hearts.

 

You need hearts to split 3-2, or 4-2 with the stiff coupled with the short heart. If both rounds of hearts hold, all following, you claim. If someone shows out on the second heart, he claims, unless he only had two hearts. If he cannot claim, you win the third heart, ruff a heart, return to hand, and pull the last diamond, and then claim.

 

The fact that Opener has J10x in hearts makes all of that irrelevant, but not irrelevant at the point of the final bidding decision unless known.