How do you bid these two Hands

[badderzboy]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sakj10haqj10982dj8c&s=sq8642hk3dackqj82]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

How do you bid these hands.

 

I got to 6♠ can you get to 7?

 

Steve

[Gerben42]

1♠ - 2NT

3♦ - 5♣

5♦ - 5♥

5NT - 7♥/♠

Pass

 

1♠: 5-card majors

2NT: Jacoby

3♦: Shortness

5♣: Voidwood

5♦: 1 or 4

5♥: Asking for trump Q

5NT: Yes and ♥K (side note: ♣A would also count as a King here)

 

Responder sees 7♥, 5♠ and ♦A.

[kenrexford]

The predicted cuebidding sequence will be ineffective in handling the North hand because the North hand needs precise inforation and cannot efectively tell a story. Therefore, it seems rather simple if North embarks on any auction that avoids the risk of South asking questions and avoids the risk of 5♣ being ambiguous.

 

The easiest course is straight-forward, but admittedly not without risk.

 

1♠-P-5♣(EKCB)-P-

(answer that shows three)-P-(bid that asks for the King of hearts)-P-

(answer that shows it)-P-7♠.

 

Partner should obviously convert to a safer 7NT with the club Ace.

[whereagles]

I probably wouldn't reach 7.

[Codo]

As always, I open these hands 1 Club.. which makes it not easier this time, but still:

 

1 ♣ 1 ♥

1 ♠ 2 ♦

3 ♠ 5 ♣

5 ♦ 5 ♥

5 NT 7 ♠

 

2 Diamond 4sf

3 Spade 5 Spades, better hand then just 2 Spade.

5 Club exclusion (All club hands had bid 4 Club)

5 Diamond 1 KC

5 Heart? Queen of Spade?

5 NT: Yes and king of Heart

7 Spade: that is all I need to know.

 

 

After an 1 Spade oepning and 2 NT response, I would never ever rebid 3 Diamond. I would show my second very strong suit with 4 Club. After this, I would never ever reach 7 Spade any more.

 

I agree that 1 Spade 5 Clubs 5 Diamonds etc. is the way it should have been bid if you start with 1 Spade.

However, if you play 30/41, you get problems:

But 1 Spade 5 Clubs 5 Heart 5 NT 6 Heart 7 Spade is still possible.

[han]

It's trivial with exclusion.

[Apollo81]

It's trivial with exclusion.

yeah

[pclayton]

1♠ - 2♥

3♣ - 3♠

3N - 4♣

4♦ - 4♥

4N - 6♣

7♠

 

3N is frivolous (in context - its a minimum 3♣ call)

6♣ is an odd number of keys and a useful, but undisclosed void.

[han]

Err Phil, why is clubs a useful void? Isn't that partner's second suit? How does partner know you don't have a diamond void and you are missing a keycard, for example KJxx AQJxxxx - Ax? How does partner know that you have such great spades and not AKx?

 

In short, I don't understand your auction at all.

 

If I was bidding Jacoby 2NT as Gerben did then my partner would probably show his side club suit instead of showing that singleton ace of diamonds. That would also complicate matters.

[pclayton]

Err Phil, why is clubs a useful void? Isn't that partner's second suit? How does partner know you don't have a diamond void and you are missing a keycard, for example KJxx AQJxxxx - Ax? How does partner know that you have such great spades and not AKx?

 

In short, I don't understand your auction at all.

 

If I was bidding Jacoby 2NT as Gerben did then my partner would probably show his side club suit instead of showing that singleton ace of diamonds. That would also complicate matters.

My Mom used to say "the pot shouldn't call the kettle "black"'. http://www.goenglish.com/ThePotCallingTheKettleBlack.asp

 

Han, you say its trivial with exclusion looking at a wide open diamond suit? I suppose its convenient that Opener could figure out that opener has a diamond control here. What's so optimal about that sequence?

 

FWIW, I hate the term "useful void" LOL. WTF does it mean? Just because it's opposite opener's 2nd suit, does it mean that it isn't useful? I can see a useful void being opener's 1st bid suit, but that's carrying things too far.

 

On the actual hand, in my sequence Opener can deduce that the opponents aren't silent with 12 diamonds.

 

Perhaps we are both (as are others) influenced a little by the actual hands, but I haven't seen any convincing ways to get to 7 that don't involve a little guesswork (like mine) or taking a view (like yours).

[han]

Yes, we could argue about whether a direct exclusion is right, it is not clear. If you use it then obviously you get to the grand with confidence. If you bid 2NT or 2H first then you won't get to use it (unless playing with Gerben). This is a very common dilemma with exclusion and a side suit open, it is rare that you can cuebid before using it. Here you might risk it you are willing to gamble on 6 if partner has the spade queen but no diamond ace.

 

If you don't know what is meant by the term "useful void" then why use it?

 

Bidding a grand because you can deduce from the opponents' silence that the useful void is in your side suit seems risky, but maybe a risk worth taking. I still really don't understand how you know that responder doesn't have AKx of trumps instead of AKJ10.

 

Given my record you could always respond with "you should say, your posts suck" when I point out that your auction is shaky. It seems too easy.

[Cascade]

If I open 1♠ which I probably will even though the spades are pretty bad:

 

1♠ 4♣* void splinter

 

4♦* 4NT** * cue ** ERKCB

 

5♦* 5♥** * 0 or 3 ** trump queen?

 

6♥* 7♠ * Yes and the ♥K

[kenrexford]

If I open 1♠ which I probably will even though the spades are pretty bad:

 

1♠ 4♣* void splinter

 

4♦* 4NT** * cue ** ERKCB

 

5♦* 5♥** * 0 or 3 ** trump queen?

 

6♥* 7♠ * Yes and the ♥K

The void splinter is a nice tool here, one that I also like. I'm not convinced whether that is the best or not, considering the weird shape, but it certainly is calculated to find out about the diamond control. The risk seems to be if Opener blasts immediately. You win when Opener bids 4♦ or 4♥, but you have some difficulty after 4NT.

[skjaeran]

1♠ - 4♣ (void)

4♦ - 4NT (EKCB)

5♣ - 5♦ (Q ask)

5♥ - 7♠ (Q+♥K is enough)

[Cascade]

If I open 1♠ which I probably will even though the spades are pretty bad:

 

1♠ 4♣* void splinter

 

4♦* 4NT** * cue ** ERKCB

 

5♦* 5♥** * 0 or 3 ** trump queen?

 

6♥* 7♠ * Yes and the ♥K

The void splinter is a nice tool here, one that I also like. I'm not convinced whether that is the best or not, considering the weird shape, but it certainly is calculated to find out about the diamond control. The risk seems to be if Opener blasts immediately. You win when Opener bids 4♦ or 4♥, but you have some difficulty after 4NT.

If partner takes control with 4NT immediately then since you are unlimited he has an obligation to at least invite Grand. It will be difficult as his heart control could be the singleton not the king.

 

♠ AKxxx

♥ x

♦ AKxx

♣ xxx

 

or similar might take control

[skjaeran]

If I open 1♠ which I probably will even though the spades are pretty bad:

 

1♠ 4♣* void splinter

 

4♦* 4NT** * cue ** ERKCB

 

5♦* 5♥** * 0 or 3 ** trump queen?

 

6♥* 7♠ * Yes and the ♥K

The void splinter is a nice tool here, one that I also like. I'm not convinced whether that is the best or not, considering the weird shape, but it certainly is calculated to find out about the diamond control. The risk seems to be if Opener blasts immediately. You win when Opener bids 4♦ or 4♥, but you have some difficulty after 4NT.

What difficulty?

 

Either you show your number of aces and await partners continuation, or you just jump to the grand at once. If partner can bid RKCB over your voidshowing splinter you can be 100% sure that 7♠ is a very good contract (normally absolutely laydown).

[kenrexford]

If I open 1♠ which I probably will even though the spades are pretty bad:

 

1♠ 4♣* void splinter

 

4♦* 4NT** * cue ** ERKCB

 

5♦* 5♥** * 0 or 3 ** trump queen?

 

6♥* 7♠ * Yes and the ♥K

The void splinter is a nice tool here, one that I also like. I'm not convinced whether that is the best or not, considering the weird shape, but it certainly is calculated to find out about the diamond control. The risk seems to be if Opener blasts immediately. You win when Opener bids 4♦ or 4♥, but you have some difficulty after 4NT.

What difficulty?

 

Either you show your number of aces and await partners continuation, or you just jump to the grand at once. If partner can bid RKCB over your voidshowing splinter you can be 100% sure that 7♠ is a very good contract (normally absolutely laydown).

Fair point.

 

I said I liked the auction! LOL

[mikeh]

Here's my try at an auction that might work:

 

1♠   2♥

3♣   3♠

4♠   5♣

5♦   5♥

5♠   6♣

6♥   7♠

 

3♣ shows extras, warranted by the ♥K

 

4♠ says I don't have anything at all in terms of slam interest, given that I have already bid 3♣

 

5♣ says I don't care... I want to go slamming.. cue bids are mandatory

 

5♦: ok, you made me cue

 

5♥ let's keep going

 

5♠: close, but the weak suit is why. The other choice is 6♥, which is more encouraging

 

6♣: grand slam try, forces opener to bid something

 

Now, opener could bid 6♣, but responder would bid 6♥ and that would surely get 7♠. I prefer 6♥ because the auction makes it sound as if that is a very important card.

 

Some style concerns: is it possible that 5♦ would be a King? I don't think so, but I confess I may be influenced by the hands.

[han]

How does responder know that opener has the spade queen Mike? Would opener not cooperate without the spade queen but with (say) AQJxx in clubs and the diamond queen? Are you willing to gamble that partner either has the spade queen or it drops?

[Cascade]

How does responder know that opener has the spade queen Mike? Would opener not cooperate without the spade queen but with (say) AQJxx in clubs and the diamond queen? Are you willing to gamble that partner either has the spade queen or it drops?

That's a pretty good gamble if you didn't know.

 

Partner is at least 5:4 on that he has the spade queen and over half of the rest of the time it will drop.

[mikeh]

How does responder know that opener has the spade queen Mike? Would opener not cooperate without the spade queen but with (say) AQJxx in clubs and the diamond queen? Are you willing to gamble that partner either has the spade queen or it drops?

Valid points.

 

But I think I can plausibly address these concerns.

 

1. It would be a strange hand indeed that opened 1♠ and rebid 3♣ with 9xxxx in spades. I am not saying no such hand exists (98xxx Kx A AKQxx is one I'd bid that way IFF I chose to treat this as a 5-5, and I might well prefer to treat this as a 4=5). I am saying that it is a relatively low frequency occurence.

 

2. Bearing in mind that the odds favour opener holding the Q or (possibly) a very weak 6 card suit, responder, at the end, will know that the grand is probably AT WORST on picking up AKJ10 opposite xxxxx for no losers. Now, if the grand is AT BEST dependent on that, I would be one of the loudest voices saying that this is a bad grand (unless you think you are heavily outgunned/need a big comeback). But there is a world of difference between the two situations.

 

Having said that, I would not pretend that I, playing with either of my favourite partners, would actually have the auction I gave. For one thing, one of them insists on opening 5-5 blacks with 1♣ :P But I do think that it is a plausible relatively standard sequence and that we MIGHT have had the auction in the '1♠ opening' partnership. I will never actually know B)

[Fluffy]

voidwood is very pretty and all, but it has 2 problems you are ignoring: diamond control and lack of ♥K wich you seem to assume will be onside.

 

 

I tried myself and couldn't reach 7. But maybe my grandma would reach it with confidence :D

 

1♠-3♥

4♦-4NT

5♥-7♥

[Echognome]

I bid it with Jason. Only got to 6♠. We couldn't make the distinction between the actual hand and Qxxxx Kx x AKxxx, which also has 5=2=1=5 shape, 4 controls, the ♠Q, ♥K and two of the top 3 club honors. Tough hand!

[Echognome]

Oh and I guess I should ask Mike if my presented alternate hand bids the same way in his auction?

 

Not to be nit-picking, but we at least thought it was guessing at grand.

[Impact]

1S 1NT R

2D= 4+C 2H R

2S= 5+5+ 2NT R

3H= 5-2-1-5 3S R

4C= 4controls 4D R

4H= no SA/K 4S R

5S= 2 top3C, HK, SQ 7S

 

but in real life surely my opponents bid a few D - unless they are 5-5 ....

 

regards