control bids style?

[kgr]

[hv=d=n&n=skxxxhkxxdxxxcaxx&s=saqjxhaqjxdakjcxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP

Pass-2D!

2H!-2NT

3C-3D

3H-3S

4C-4D

4H-4S[/hv]

2D!= multi and 2NT shows 22-24 HCP

3C=Niemyer, 3D= 4 card Major, 3H= Spades, 3S=spade fit

4C, 4D, 4H = 1st or 2nd control

 

Who should have bid more?

And more important: Maybe we should always go to 6S with 32 HCP and a fit, but what is your style for the conrol bids:

- Did South promise extras with his 4D control bid or does he always have to give controls? Also taking into account that North can give less serious slem interest by bidding 3NT iso 4C.

- Does 4H bid by North have a meaning. Does it ask South to continue if not minimal?

- Can South bid more then 4S or would you expect that that would always be done by the less defined hand? (On this hand it is difficult for South to know his partner has Club K or A)

[gwnn]

North has a great hand, he should almost force to slam opposite a 20-21 count, let alone a 22-24 NT!! I think I would just bid 6♠ over 3♠

[kenrexford]

A couple of observations.

 

1. When Opener bid 3♠, he had five options -- 3♠, 4♣, 4♦, 4♥, or 4♠. The election to bid 3♠ should, IMO, show contextual slam interest (at least mild) with good trumps. Hence, I agree that Responder cannot now stop short of slam unless Opener lacks a diamond control.

 

2. 4♣ makes sense if 3NT is frivolous -- a club control and serious interest. However, my guess is that the use of 3NT in this sort of sequence is more of a tactical decision (bid 3NT if you tactically want to get below 4♣ for some reason).

 

3. 4♦ is obvious.

 

4. 4♥? Sounds like Last Train. I don't like it. North/Responder has all he needs. South will not like AQJx opposite a suspected xx(x). I think all was well until the 4♥ call. That suggests, IMO, a need for a heart control, and probably a club card, strangely.

 

Blame? North.

[han]

North should grow some courage.

 

Your spelling "Niemyer" seems very wrong.

[jdonn]

I would have bid 5NT over 3♠ as north, then 6♠ over anything to offer a choice between spades and notrump. Too much cuebidding, too little evaluating.

[kenrexford]

I would have bid 5NT over 3♠ as north, then 6♠ over anything to offer a choice between spades and notrump. Too much cuebidding, too little evaluating.

This is true, as it is very difficult to construct a hand where Opener (1) lacks a diamond control but (2) has "extras."

[nige1]

[hv=d=n&n=skxxxhkxxdxxxcaxx&s=saqjxhaqjxdakjcxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP

Pass-2D!

2H!-2NT

3C-3D

3H-3S

4C-4D

4H-4S[/hv]

2D!= multi and 2NT shows 22-24 HCP

3C=Niemyer, 3D= 4 card Major, 3H= Spades, 3S=spade fit

4C, 4D, 4H = 1st or 2nd control

 

Who should have bid more?

North deserves all the blame :angry: :angry: :angry:

I am ashamed to confess that, 2 days ago, my partner and I suffered a similar debacle. An almost identical auction, on very similar hands, except our 4-4 fit was ♥. :(

2♦ - 2♥

2N - 3♣

3♦ - 3♠

4♣ - 4♦

4♥ - AP

(Some of our bids had different meanings - for example 4♣ showed a ♥ fit and 3 keycards which seems to be a better treatment than cue-bids).

I held the 10 count and it was all my fault :( :( :(

Partner had shown 22-24 but I thought he had shown 18-20 :)

[Codo]

I think it was the lack of agreements, which made you fail.

 

Like Ken said, you had no idea, whether 3 ♠ or 4 ♣♦♥♠ showed a better/worse hand.

You had no agreement if 4 ♣ was stronger or weaker then 3 NT.

You had no agreement whether 4♥ was last train or a control.

 

So, without these agreeements, you needed to guess with the north hand, whether you want to play 4 or 6 Spade. The guess you took was far anti percentage.