Invite slam or not?

[skjaeran]

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sq53haq92dkq97ca4]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦ (1♠) x (2♣)

2♥ (p) ?[/hv]

 

You've got this nice hand. Partner has shown an unbalanced hand with 4=4=4=1 or 4=5+ in the red suits.

 

How do you proceed?

[han]

4-4-4-1 is possible but does not seem likely. Would 3D be forcing here (I think so). If so I'd bid it and see what happens.

[Cascade]

4-4-4-1 is possible but does not seem likely. Would 3D be forcing here (I think so). If so I'd bid it and see what happens.

Makes sense if the double 100% guarantees four hearts.

 

If I wasn't sure I would bid 3♣ and support hearts next time and think I had done enough.

[Impact]

The more D he has the more likely a minimum slam is possible (eg x KJxx Axxxxx xx) but the bidding makes it more likely that he holds at least 2S....so I think a 3C general cue with a descriptive response to elicit distribution and one below game slam-try in H may be enough (you do not want to be in slam opposite most minimum 4-4-4-1 after the 1S overcall but do you really believe they have 10C between them on this auction? yes 3-7 is possible).

 

I like Wayne's general plan but do not know how partenr will distinguish between great minima eg my example and others...

[han]

Makes sense if the double 100% guarantees four hearts.

I don't remember ever doubling without 4 hearts here. If you double so frequently without 4 hearts that it affects your follow-ups in an auction like this because partner won't trust you.. then I'd say you are losing a lot.

 

I don't know of any hand with diamond support that would fake a negative double btw, could you give an example where you think this is a good idea?

[skjaeran]

The double absolutely guarantee 4c hearts. Veeery seldom it could contain 5.

[jdonn]

It's very possible to have 5 hearts and remotely possible (depending on your style) to have 3, but in either case you are never good enough to bid again. So any bid over 2♥ by partner shows exactly four hearts.

[han]

It's very possible to have 5 hearts.

I think Harald plays some transfer at the 2-level so he will have 5 hearts far less likely.

[jdonn]

It's very possible to have 5 hearts.

I think Harald plays some transfer at the 2-level so he will have 5 hearts far less likely.

Fair enough. The original post is his so we go by his system :o

[benlessard]

3D waiting for next round of bidding

[gnasher]

It's very possible to have 5 hearts and remotely possible (depending on your style) to have 3, but in either case you are never good enough to bid again.

Are you sure about that? I can't see any need to double here with three hearts and a non-strong hand; the time that you might want to allow it is when responder has a strong 4=3=3=3 without a spade stop - something like xxxx AQx Kxx Axx.

[gnasher]

You don't need partner to have a particularly good minimum. Kx Kxxx A8xxx Jx will look pretty awful to him, but makes a 60% slam. Ax J8xx AJ10xx Kx will look like a better hand from his point of view, but is borderline for slam purposes. Essentially it needs the overcaller to have HK and SK, and not four hearts - if he has a trump trick, you can eliminate the minors and endplay him.

 

I think I would bid 3D (presumably a one-round force with diamond support), and over 3H bid 4C, showing club control and denying spade control. If he bids 4D over that, he'll promise a control in spades, and I'll bid 4NT. I think he should bid 4D even with only a positional spade control.

 

Unfortunately I'll end up in slam opposite Ax xxxx AJ10xx Kx, or at the five level opposite Kx xxxx AJ10xx Kx. At least these both have play.

 

If partner jumps to 4H over 3D, I'll bid 5C, again denying a spade control, so that his 5D will promise one. He might not bid 5D with only Kx in spades, but I don't think he'd have bid 4H with an apparently wasted king and a minimum.

 

By the way, in auctions like this, where you have agreed a major and the unlimited hand makes a bid which is usually a game try that might be a slam try, I think that responder should bid 3NT to accept, rather than four of the major. This is usually unwanted in a natural sense, and provides opener with more space when he does happen to have a slam try. A more typical auction for this would be 1S-2S-3D-3NT.

[whereagles]

I'll start with 2♠ and see what happens.

[Guest Jlall]

3D seems like a normal start, we could belong in 6D and it shows partner the double fit.

[kenrexford]

This is an unbalanced diamond opening, right?

 

Well, it looks like partner may well have something like Axx-4-5-1 also, which makes a slam fairly good, as the spade hook late is marked. We have plenty of space, so why not start this thing up?

 

3♦ would be my start also.

[skjaeran]

Partner held Axx KTxx ATxxx x. I bid too timid, stopping in 4♥+2. The good news was that opps didn't stop short of 7♦ at the other table, earning us 13 IMPs for our "effort". :)

[kenrexford]

So, after Responder's 3♦, Opener bids 3♠, Responder bids 3NT Serious, Opener bids 4♣, Opener rebids 4♦ to show two top diamonds, and we are off to the races.

 

Or, if less aggressive, Responder bids 4♣ non-serious, and Opener bids 4♦ LTTC, which Responder will gladly accept.

[gnasher]

Well, it looks like partner may well have something like Axx-4-5-1 also, which makes a slam fairly good, as the spade hook late is marked.

You can take a spade finesse if you like. Personally, I'd just ruff a club and claim my 12 top tricks.

 

So, after Responder's 3♦, Opener bids 3♠, Responder bids 3NT Serious, Opener bids 4♣, Opener rebids 4♦ to show two top diamonds, and we are off to the races.

Why would opener bid 3S? As far as he's concerned, responder has made a *game try*, not a slam try.

[kenrexford]

Well, it looks like partner may well have something like Axx-4-5-1 also, which makes a slam fairly good, as the spade hook late is marked.

You can take a spade finesse if you like. Personally, I'd just ruff a club and claim my 12 top tricks.

 

So, after Responder's 3♦, Opener bids 3♠, Responder bids 3NT Serious, Opener bids 4♣, Opener rebids 4♦ to show two top diamonds, and we are off to the races.

Why would opener bid 3S? As far as he's concerned, responder has made a *game try*, not a slam try.

If you are going to accept the game try, make the call that caters to the slam try. If it turns out to have been a mere game try, partner will sign off. If you assume a game try only and just bid game, partner will be stuck. IMO, this is one huge area of failing for many people.

[gnasher]

If you are going to accept the game try, make the call that caters to the slam try. If it turns out to have been a mere game try, partner will sign off. If you assume a game try only and just bid game, partner will be stuck. IMO, this is one huge area of failing for many people.

It's even worse to be obliged to make a descriptive bid in reply to a game/slam try, on the off chance that partner has a slam try. The occasional gains on slam hands will never make up for the IMPs lost by helping the defence on all the hands where you are in a marginal game.

 

The answer, as I said in an earlier post, is for responder to accept the game try by making a bid which is economical but doesn't say anything about his hand. I'd be happy to bid 3S over 3D, as long as all that it says is "I'm accepting your game try".

[kenrexford]

If you are going to accept the game try, make the call that caters to the slam try.  If it turns out to have been a mere game try, partner will sign off.  If you assume a game try only and just bid game, partner will be stuck.  IMO, this is one huge area of failing for many people.

It's even worse to be obliged to make a descriptive bid in reply to a game/slam try, on the off chance that partner has a slam try. The occasional gains on slam hands will never make up for the IMPs lost by helping the defence on all the hands where you are in a marginal game.

 

The answer, as I said in an earlier post, is for responder to accept the game try by making a bid which is economical but doesn't say anything about his hand. I'd be happy to bid 3S over 3D, as long as all that it says is "I'm accepting your game try".

That's true, but I solve the problem, in a sense, before the reply.

 

After a major is raised in a non-forcing sequence, I use 2NT as a "generic game try." Quantitative bash. 3NT only a possible end contract after a 2NT game try.

 

In contrast, suit-based game tries always force the partnership to declare the major (if game only) and are the usual start for slam sequences as well. In this scenario, we already have directed the defense, in a sense.

 

Now, I'll grant that in this specific scenario, we might not have told the defense whether to lead clubs or to lead spades. However, the opponents have had quite a bit of discussion themselves. It seems rather silly to not disclose what you have to partner in the context of the opponents already having exchanged information themselves. What, do you think that the opening lead might be a spade if Opener cannot show a spade control? I bet that card was hitting the table anyway, myself.