What's the difference?

[dburn]

My style is that 4♣ shows extras with no clear direction and 4NT is quantitative. So the 4♣ bid would deny a club control (i.e. K AQJxx AKxx xxx). In this style, 4NT could conceal a four card club suit. So I would try 7♣ (choice of slams) over 6♦.

 

While there are hands on which a 4-3 club fit is the only making grand, it seems that there is no obvious reason that our ruffing diamonds will not produce extra tricks whereas partner's ruffing spades will (in fact you need a place to put all these spade losers and you aren't likely to get enough ruffs to set up the suit). It seems like the odds of 7♣ failing on a 5-1 club break when 7♥ was making are about equal to the odds of 7♣ making when 7♥ fails.

 

So if 4♣ would've shown four clubs and 4NT denies four clubs, then I would just bid 7♥.

 

While I don't agree with Rexford's "always bid 2♣" strategy in general, I do like an immediate 2♣ response on this hand. It seems that responding in spades has additional problems (besides the hard to GF after 2♦ issues); for example what if partner raises spades on three, how do you back in to hearts? Assuming hearts are agreed, how do you convince partner that a spade holding like Qx(x) is awful whereas the club king is a huge card? Or that a singleton spade is great, whereas a singleton club is lousy? It seems that responding in spades will make partner suspect exactly the opposite of what's best here. And it's not like forcing game is a piece of cake after a start like 1♥-1♠-2♥ either. There are many cases like this where, if you know that you have a fit for partner's suit and need to temporize by bidding a new suit, it is better to bid the new suit where fitting kings or queens are useful and a singleton is bad, rather than vice versa.

Sometimes, I have difficulty believing that posts here are for real.

 

Playing with Ken Rexford and Adam Myerson as my team-mates the other day, my opponents held:

 

♠KQxx

♥Axxxx

♦AKxx

♣None

 

♠Axxxx

♥Kxx

♦x

♣AQJx

 

They bid confidently to 7♠, a contract that needed a little good fortune. Spades were 2-2 though, which enabled them to circumvent the 4-1 heart break easily enough.

 

On comparing scores, I was shocked to see that we had lost 2310 aggregate points on this deal. "What happened?" I enquired. "Well", said Myerson and Rexford in unison, "the auction started 1♥-2♣-2♦, and now we could never find our spade fit, so of course we played in 6♥ and the trumps broke 4-1."

 

"You morons", I screamed - then awoke to find that it was all a dream. Or was it?

[xcurt]

Why didn't I issue a game-forcing heart raise at my first call with this hand? OK I don't have the fourth trump I would be promising, but if this is my alternative, how bad can that be?

 

At this point I guess to bid 7H, even though I'm laying 1530/750 or slightly more than 2:1 odds. I don't think partner can cuebid here with less than HAQ, DA, CK. Opposite that I need 3-2 hearts and nothing really awful to happen when I try to ruff 2 diamonds in my hand. Partner has to have another card which could reduce the number of diamond ruffs required to 1.

 

Interestingly, bidding the grand at IMPs only lays 17:13 odds (they bid the small slam) or 26:17 (they miss the small slam) so in either case we need better odds at aggregate.

[kenrexford]

♠KQxx

♥Axxxx

♦AKxx

♣None

 

♠Axxxx

♥Kxx

♦x

♣AQJx

Ah -- one problem, though. Opener is supposed to avoid a 2♦ rebid when he has four spades. Thus, with the suggested deal:

 

O: 1♥

R: 2♣

O: 2♠ (planning to bid diamonds later if needed)

R: 3♠...

 

If Opener has 4504, same principle. Show the spades and then raise the clubs.

 

After 1♥-P-2♣-P-2♠, Responder is expected to bid a waiting 2NT a lot to allow minor suit completion.

 

One might argue that a more effective method of bidding would allow:

 

1♥-P-2♣-P-

2♦-P-2♠-P-

3♠

 

However, 2♠ as a fourth-suit forcing bid makes this latter auction uncertain as establishing a fit, whereas bidding spades first avoids that uncertainty.

[benlessard]

But it's not as bad as you say, partner can't possibly be 2542 that's an obvious 3S bid over 4SF without two club stops.

 

With Kx of clubs partner will try to bid Nt to rightside the contract if Qxx vs Kx.+ a 3S bid followed by a 4nt would be keycard. So 4Nt is natural and could be many shapes imo.

 

Imo the real problem is that 3H isnt forcing. For me its so obvious that a GF bid is more important then a limit raise where i want to show my spades first. I rarely want to show a suit before raising unless im sure the opps wont interfere.

 

Its one more hand where 4st inv is a lot better then 4th forcing. I agree 4th suit INV aint perfect but i prefer to have problems on invitationnal hand then on GF hands.

 

1H---1S

2D---???

 

Its so obvious that 3D/3H/3S forcing and 2H multi inv is better then the otherway around. (3D/3H/3S) inv and 2H art GF.

[gnasher]

With Kx of clubs partner will try to bid Nt to rightside the contract if Qxx vs Kx.+ a 3S bid followed by a 4nt would be keycard. So 4Nt is natural and could be many shapes imo.

That argument might apply if he were bidding 3NT. Given that he is about to make a bid that suggests playing in 6NT, he's unlikely to be worried by what might happen if he is missing ♣A and loses a trick in another suit.

 

His extra values will also make him more interested in exploring the right strain, so he's unlikely to make a space-consuming jump when he has another bid available which is both cheaper and more descriptive.

 

1H---1S

2D---???

 

Its so obvious that 3D/3H/3S forcing and 2H multi inv is better then the otherway around. (3D/3H/3S) inv and 2H art GF.

 

I assume that you mean "3C multi inv"?

 

This sounds an interesting idea. What does responder do when he has a game force playable in several strains, but nothing obvious to show at the three level, such as AQ10xx Kx xxx Axx or AQ10xx Kx Axx xxx ?

[han]

I agree that partner should jump to 4NT with xx AQJxx AQJx Kx rather than bidding a less descriptive 3S.

 

For me 6D would absolutely deny the spade king, a big card on this auction. I'd bid 6H now.

[Finch]

The consensus from those who commented seems to be that 4C is a 1543 without a club stop (and hence lots of extra high cards).

 

There is a strong vote that 4NT might be 2542 but I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that front, I really can't construct a hand without two high club honours that would bid 4NT when the 'origin' of partner's 3C bid might be a game force in spades.

 

Anyway, the grand slam bidders are +1510 whether you bid 7H or 7C.

 

Partner has

x

AQJ10x

AQJ9

K10x

[Finch]

I agree that partner should jump to 4NT with xx AQJxx AQJx Kx rather than bidding a less descriptive 3S.

 

For me 6D would absolutely deny the spade king, a big card on this auction. I'd bid 6H now.

Is this post totally consistent?

 

Opposite your example 2542 7H is pretty much cold. When we know partner has the CK from the 4NT bid, it doesn't really matter if she is 2-2 or 1-3 in the blacks.

[Finch]

Why didn't I issue a game-forcing heart raise at my first call with this hand? OK I don't have the fourth trump I would be promising, but if this is my alternative, how bad can that be?

 

.

Don't forget partner's 2D rebid was the worst possible one from your point of view; anything else (1NT, 2C, 2H, 2S, 2NT, 3C, 3D, 3H, 3S, 3NT...) would have been fine.

 

Maybe it's my 4-card major upbringing, but I shudder at the thought of showing four trumps via a game forcing raise when I only have three.

[nige1]

Anyway, the grand slam bidders are +1510 whether you bid 7H or 7C. Partner has ♠x ♥AQJ10x ♦AQJ9 ♣K10x

I hope you did not lose the match by 100 points for honours :)

[Finch]

Anyway, the grand slam bidders are +1510 whether you bid 7H or 7C. Partner has ♠x ♥AQJ10x ♦AQJ9 ♣K10x

I hope you did not lose the match by 100 points for honours :)

Good point. +1610.

 

(we lost 500 points on the deal, so I must have had the original vulnerability wrong)

[kenrexford]

Partner has

x

AQJ10x

AQJ9

K10x

Let's see what could have occurred:

 

1♥-P-2♣-P-

2♦-P-2♥-P-

3♣(two top hearts, plus the club King)-P-3♥(the third top heart, no diamond honor)-P-

3♠(spade control)-P-3NT(serious)-P-

4♦ (two top diamonds)-P-4NT(RKCB)...7♥

 

If not my cuebidding, it seems that Opener could clarify the 1543 pattern (3♣), later cue the club King (4♣) and then later show the heart A-Q and diamond A as a response to RKCB.

 

How did the opponents run into a problem?

[cherdano]

I agree that partner should jump to 4NT with xx AQJxx AQJx Kx rather than bidding a less descriptive 3S.

 

For me 6D would absolutely deny the spade king, a big card on this auction. I'd bid 6H now.

Is this post totally consistent?

 

Opposite your example 2542 7H is pretty much cold. When we know partner has the CK from the 4NT bid, it doesn't really matter if she is 2-2 or 1-3 in the blacks.

Why is it cold? (On a trump lead.) I agree though that the ♠K is not a very relevant card, we just need a second king besides all the keycards, or hope we don't get into entry troubles.

[kenrexford]

[never mind -- misread]

[benlessard]

That argument might apply if he were bidding 3NT. Given that he is about to make a bid that suggests playing in 6NT, he's unlikely to be worried by what might happen if he is missing ♣A and loses a trick in another suit.

With a big 2542 and the protected K of clubs why would he bid 3S ? With 5 reasonnable spades a doubleton H and maybe a diamond fit you might endup in 4S. If you bid 3S and partner raise to 4S is 4Nt keycard or natural ? It make sense to play 4nt as natural when you are limited and made a preference and partner showned no extras, but its a very rare and precise agreement.

AQT42

K9

Kxxx

xx

 

xx

AQJ10x

AQJ9

Kx

4Nt/4H/5D are quite better contract then 4S. Can you blame partner for bidding 4S over your 3S ?

The consensus from those who commented seems to be that 4C is a 1543 without a club stop (and hence lots of extra high cards).

Im wondering what ive would have done with a 0553 or 0643 and bad hearts. For me a 3D bid doesnt really show a 5th D, a bad 1543 and no club stopper or 2542 with good hearts or even 2641 and lousy H is a possible 3D rebid for me.

[gnasher]

AQT42

K9

Kxxx

xx

 

xx

AQJ10x

AQJ9

Kx

4Nt/4H/5D are quite better contract then 4S. Can you blame partner for bidding 4S over your 3S ?

Yes, I can. He knows I'm probably 2542 - with a 3541 minimum I'd have raised to 2♠ - so, even if he's not going to show his diamond support, he should still offer a choice between the majors. I think that the right way to do this is via 4♣, so that 4♥ can promise three card support and 4♦ can set trumps.

[Finch]

AQT42

K9

Kxxx

xx

 

xx

AQJ10x

AQJ9

Kx

4Nt/4H/5D are quite better contract then 4S. Can you blame partner for bidding 4S over your 3S ?

Yes, I can. He knows I'm probably 2542 - with a 3541 minimum I'd have raised to [2SP] - so, even if he's not going to show his diamond support, he should still offer a choice between the majors.

I agree with this.

 

For me the sample hand is a poor example, because it's either a raise of 2D to 3D immediately, or (if worth a game force) a 4D bid over 3S. But give responder a 5233 game force and the point is valid.

 

I think that the right way to do this is via 4♣, so that 4♥ can promise three card support and 4♦ can set trumps.

 

I don't agree with this. Given that 4H is (probably) a non-forcing slam try with 3 hearts and 4D agrees diamonds, you need some way to agree spades in a forcing manner, and 4C is the only way to do this. And you'd quite like some way to agree hearts in a forcing manner and you don't have that either...

 

It's a horrible auction. Move the order of the suits around and everything works much better.

[gnasher]

I don't agree with this. Given that 4H is (probably) a non-forcing slam try with 3 hearts and 4D agrees diamonds, you need some way to agree spades in a forcing manner, and 4C is the only way to do this. And you'd quite like some way to agree hearts in a forcing manner and you don't have that either...

 

It's a horrible auction. Move the order of the suits around and everything works much better.

Unfortunately, the rules of bridge doesn't allow us to say "this is a horrible auction", and move onto the next board. You still have to find a bid as responder over 3♠ with AQ10xx Kx Kxx xxx.

 

Since finding the right game takes priority over slam investigations, I'm prepared to bid 4♣ on both the "choice of games" type and the hands that are too strong to bid 4♥ or 4♠. What would you suggest instead?

[Finch]

Well, on this type of hand I would usually bid 3NT over 3S suggesting doubt about the final contract (i.e. suggesting I don't have much of a club stop). I would rather have some sort of club honour, mind you.

[gnasher]

Hmm. Do you think we've persuaded anyone that the right bid over 3♣ with a strong 2542 containing ♣Kx is 3♠?

[Finch]

Hmm. Do you think we've persuaded anyone that the right bid over 3♣ with a strong 2542 containing ♣Kx is 3♠?

No.

 

But given that the only person contributing to this thread that I'm ever likely to play with is you, that probably doesn't matter.

[benlessard]

I assume that you mean "3C multi inv"?

 

This sounds an interesting idea. What does responder do when he has a game force playable in several strains, but nothing obvious to show at the three level, such as AQ10xx Kx xxx Axx or AQ10xx Kx Axx xxx ?

Yes i meant 3C as multi inv. If the multi inv is under 2Nt then 2Nt can be used for unclear gameforce. GF.

 

1D---1S

2C---???

 

regular 4th suit GF

2H GF but need a rebid to clarify

2S to play

2Nt INV

3C INV

3D INV

3H INV for most of the players to GF with S & H its 2H followed by 3H

3S INV

 

Inversion

2H multi inv

2S to play

2Nt GF

3C GF

3D GF

3H GF

3S GF

 

1st of all since you are more likely to hit a GF hand then an invitationnal hand the inv style seems better.

 

2nd there is only a 2 space difference between 2H GF and 2nt GF wich is a small price to pay for unclear GF hands.

 

3 you can invite and finish in 2S not 3S

 

4 Unclear invitationnal hand are much better handled by a multi inv.

 

AJT98

Axx

Jxx

xx

 

In regular its a close call between 2Nt/3D and the game in S is easily possible.

By bidding a multi inv and pass or correct response.

 

2H----???

 

2S = i refuse a S inv

2Nt = i accept a S inv but refuse a Nt INV (a normal 2nt bid)

3C = i accept a S & NT inv but refuse a C inv (a normal 3C inv bid)

 

So if partner refuse a S inv you can try your luck in 2Nt or 3D.

If partner accept a S inv you have an easy 4S bid. If opener take a lot of space its doesnt bother you because hes maximum and accept all your game try, so no need for slam bidding and signing off in game should pose no problems.

 

The opposite isnt true when 2H is GF, the 3rd bid by opener will be all over the place denying responder the chance to established fit at a confortable level for slam/game exploration.

 

1D-----1S

2C-----2H (GF)

here if opener rebid 2S or 2Nt or 3C all is well. But if he rebid 3D/3H/3S/3nt its a different story.

 

The downside of multi inv will come in a later post.