Now what?

[awm]

Here's a hand from teams today. The auction started 1♣-P-1♥-P-2♣-P. In our style, we often rebid 1NT with a singleton heart and reverse or jump rebid fairly light, so 2♣ is often (but not always) six cards and 11-14 or so. What's your next call?

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sqhaxxxxdatxcj9xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

[Winstonm]

3C

[Guest Jlall]

3S seems ok

[655321]

3♠ (Game forcing hand with a singleton spade) or 5♣ (enough for game, not risking 3NT when opponents have 9 or more spades, not looking for the perfect fit slam that is admittedly possible) both seem reasonable bids to me.

[mike777]

3c=good invite I hope, not weakish.

 

I assume 3s=splinter and slam try, not "just" invite to game.

 

If 3c=random hand then I am stuck with 3s.

[jdonn]

3♠. We would bid 3♣ with one of the aces removed.

[skjaeran]

3♠ looks like the obvious choice to me.

[han]

3S for me too.

[pclayton]

3♠. I'm pretty amazed at the votes for 3♣.

[kenrexford]

3♠ is available. 2♦ otherwise.

[awm]

At the table I was worried that 3♠ sounds like a better hand. After all, we have effectively two aces and out (the ♠Q and ♣J are not likely to be useful here). Admittedly the shape makes this quite a nice hand, but splintering might oversell it a bit. For example give partner something like:

 

♠xxx

♥Qx

♦Kx

♣AKQxxx

 

This is a maximum 2♣ rebid with a perfect spade holding of three small. It's easy to imagine partner checking keycards on this hand and then bidding 6♣, which has no actual play. Of course, there do exist hands where 6♣ is good (i.e. xxx x KQx AKQxxx) and should also be bid opposite a splinter, but partner is actually likely to evaluate Hx in hearts as "better" than a singleton heart when the opposite is true.

 

In any case, I chose to bid 5♣, as 3♣ seems like a big underbid (yes, it does show a decent hand, but ♣AKxxxx and a red king probably makes game here and I don't see partner accepting with that) and 3♠ is potentially an overbid. Partner's actual hand:

 

♠xxx

♥x

♦KQJx

♣AKxxx

 

Slam is on ♣Q singleton or doubleton; bidding 3♠ probably gets us there while 3♣ and 5♣ likely play in those contracts. Partner didn't want to rebid 1NT on three small spades; the other table actually did rebid 1NT and landed in a club partial making six!

[kenrexford]

I think you gave partner too little credit. With the hand you proposed for the RKCB-then-6 auction, RKCB-then-6 would be gross. There is a lot of space between 3♠ and 5♣.

 

The actual hand is much better than the proposed hand.

 

♠xxx ♥Qx ♦Kx ♣AKQxxx

♠xxx ♥x ♦KQJx ♣AKxxx

 

The first has six losers. The stiff covers two, meaning that he needs three more. Two Aces will not work.

 

The second has the same six losers. However, two Aces may well do the trick (as it did) because club length (shown by the 3♠ call) works very often to grab that extra trick, even without the club Queen.

 

In other words, the club Queen in the first is a redundancy, really. Remove the Queen and you have the same hand, contextually.

 

I understand that 3♠ looks like a big bid, where maybe Opener should view either as enough if that view of 3♠ is accurate. However, it appears to not be accurate to many, such that Opener should scream but resign if Responder declines to cooperate any more.

[mike777]

At the table I was worried that 3♠ sounds like a better hand. After all, we have effectively two aces and out (the ♠Q and ♣J are not likely to be useful here). Admittedly the shape makes this quite a nice hand, but splintering might oversell it a bit. For example give partner something like:

 

♠xxx

♥Qx

♦Kx

♣AKQxxx

 

This is a maximum 2♣ rebid with a perfect spade holding of three small. It's easy to imagine partner checking keycards on this hand and then bidding 6♣, which has no actual play. Of course, there do exist hands where 6♣ is good (i.e. xxx x KQx AKQxxx) and should also be bid opposite a splinter, but partner is actually likely to evaluate Hx in hearts as "better" than a singleton heart when the opposite is true.

 

In any case, I chose to bid 5♣, as 3♣ seems like a big underbid (yes, it does show a decent hand, but ♣AKxxxx and a red king probably makes game here and I don't see partner accepting with that) and 3♠ is potentially an overbid. Partner's actual hand:

 

♠xxx

♥x

♦KQJx

♣AKxxx

 

Slam is on ♣Q singleton or doubleton; bidding 3♠ probably gets us there while 3♣ and 5♣ likely play in those contracts. Partner didn't want to rebid 1NT on three small spades; the other table actually did rebid 1NT and landed in a club partial making six!

Why would partner pass a good 3c invite with the given hand. I would always drive to at least game. Reading the wtp with 3s seems to assume 3c is a pretty minimum bid.

[ArtK78]

In other threads, the raise to 3♣ is a courtesy raise, not promising much more than a fit.

 

So, the 3♠ bid is consistent with the philosophy that a 3♣ raise doesn't promise much.

 

So is opener's pass of the raise to 3♣.

 

That said, I don't necessarily agree with that philosophy. To me, the raise to 3♣ shows invitational values, and is sufficient on these cards.

[goobers]

I think in other hands a 3C raise came after a forcing 1N auction, like

 

1S - 1N

2C - 3C

 

where 3C was a courtesy raise. Can this be applied here as well? In the forcing NT auction, opener could have as much as 17-18, but isn't that not the case here?

[cherdano]

I think in other hands a 3C raise came after a forcing 1N auction, like

 

1S - 1N

2C - 3C

 

where 3C was a courtesy raise. Can this be applied here as well? In the forcing NT auction, opener could have as much as 17-18, but isn't that not the case here?

No it is not. 1C 1H 3C shows an invitational hand, 1S 1N 3C shows a game forcing hand. Hence the upper limit of 1S 1N 2C is much higher.

[cherdano]

I don't think 3S promises slam interest, it is allowed to bid 3S with a purely COG hand.

[ArtK78]

I think in other hands a 3C raise came after a forcing 1N auction, like

 

1S - 1N

2C - 3C

 

where 3C was a courtesy raise.  Can this be applied here as well?  In the forcing NT auction, opener could have as much as 17-18, but isn't that not the case here?

Raising 2♣ after a forcing 1NT shows significant club support (usually at least 5 clubs) and invitational values. Opener doesn't promise more than 3 clubs (and, on the auction 1♥ - 1NT - 2♣, only a doubleton if the partnership does not play Flannery).

 

So, I would say that you actually have the sequences backward, as the raise to 3♣ after a forcing 1NT followed by a 2♣ rebid by opener shows a good hand (less than a game force, of course).

 

Note: I can't come up with any hand that would rebid 2♣ after a forcing 1NT response when opener has 17-18 HCP. Opener should be able to come up with some stronger bid than 2♣ (assuming a standard forcing 1NT structure).

 

Caveat: After 1♥ - 1NT (forcing) - 2♣, a 2♠ bid shows a massive club raise which was not worth a 2/1 on the previous round. So, the "mere" raise to 3♣ shows less than what a 2♠ bid would show.

[awm]

A typical 3♣ bid is something like:

 

♠xx

♥AKxx

♦Axxx

♣xxx

 

♠KQxx

♥Kxxx

♦xx

♣Qxx

 

In general it shows something like 10-11 hcp with 3-4♣. Occasionally it could be lighter with 4♣ and shortness. Note that opener's 13-count with only five clubs doesn't give you a great shot at game opposite either of these two hands (and 4♣ could easily fail if clubs go 4-1). I don't really see why 23-24 combined hcp with a 5-3 club fit is a game bid.

 

There are a couple questions for the 3♠ bidders. One is how you plan to keep partner out of slam when he has a "perfect" spade holding but a doubleton heart. Another is whether you plan to pass 3NT if partner tries bidding it.

[cherdano]

To answer Adam's question: I will bid 5♣ over any slam try by partner, if he still insists on bidding 6♣ then I will say a confident "glp".

If partner bids 3N, then of course I pass, what are you worried about? I have spade stopper help, and I have aces which is always good for 3N opposite a 6-card suit. In fact I am more worried about missing 3N because partner thinks his AT9 is a single stopper.

[mike777]

ok

 

I think perhaps those(me) that bid 3c thought it was more than this given one club could be ten to 11 hcp in your examples. 12-13 support points.

[mikeh]

Adam, in terms of your concerns about a bad slam after a splinter... I really do not understand how anyone could/would/should launch into keycard with two quick losers in a non-cuebid suit. Of course, as we all know, I don't use keycard in minor suit auctions very often... if I were playing kickback, I'd have 4♥ available, but that would look like: Axx x Kxx AQ10xxx.

 

With a hand that has xxx Qx Kx AKQxxx, a couple of points.

 

The first is that this isn't that great a hand, since the club Q is not really pulling its weight.. we rate to be on a minimum of a 10 card fit, so the Queen is not roadkill but not as helpful as a middle trump honour usually is.

 

The second is that this is an easy hand to bid without keycard.

 

Cue 4♦, and over 4♥, bid 4N.... still interested in slam, not enough to bid slam now, and no convenient cue. If responder has extra values, he can bid slam (with a huge hand including first round spade control, he can cue above 5♣).

 

On the given hand, responder has done his all via 3♠ so will sign off in 5♣.

 

I figure that if I post enough of these 4N non-keycard, non-natural auctions, maybe I'll persuade someone other than those already using the style (Impact and Frances, I think :D )

[awm]

I remain unconvinced by these cuebidding auctions. For example:

 

Many people claim to cuebid up the line. Yet some of the same people say that if partner makes a slam try over 3♠ they will bid 5♣, failing to show either of the two first round controls outside the suit. Yes, denying your red suit aces will keep partner out of slam when it's bad, but it seems likely there are many hands that make 6♣ where partner can't kick it in because he's missing three first round controls (spades, hearts, diamonds) with no other losers.

 

The idea that a 3♣ raise shows better than 11 hcp with a three-card fit is unbelievable to me. Even if you do open pretty light at times, surely you are not rebidding 3♣ routinely with 13 hcp and six clubs? The rules for opening bids are not as mysterious as Mike777 seems to make them out. You open if you have a balanced 12 hcp in standard. There are some hands with less than 12 hcp which are still "better" than a typical 12 hcp balanced hand, for example AK+A and some tens is better than the average twelve hcp even though it's just 11. And a 10-11 point hand with a nice six card suit (i.e. xxx x Kxx AKTxxx) is better than a typical balanced 12 too. There is a little bit of dispute about how to evaluate shape at the opening bid, because these shapely hands can be incredibly powerful opposite a good fit and at the same time incredibly lousy opposite a misfit. Anyway, the hands where you invite opposite an opening are hands with around 11 hcp (i.e. partner needs about a queen more than a balanced 12 for game). Sometimes a hand with fewer than 11 "high card points" is worth an invite because you have a good fit for partner (i.e. you can guarantee partner's long suit will run in 3NT, or you have the ability to ruff in a likely suit contract).

 

For Mike's auction, I am not a huge fan of keycard either, but this sequence still doesn't unravel the situation. After 1♣-1♥-2♣-3♠-4♦-4♥, what is opener to do with a rock-solid hand that is simply missing two first round controls (i.e. xxx x KQx AKQxxx)? It seems ridiculous to bid 6♣ now with a singleton in partner's first bid suit (give partner x AKQxx JTx JTxx for an obvious splinter and 4♥ cue that could easily make slam if the ♦KQ were the ace). So regardless of whether it's "keycard" or "further try for slam with no cue" opener is bidding 4NT with this hand. My point is just that after splintering it is quite hard to get to slam opposite the one hand while avoiding it opposite the other.

[cherdano]

So awm, you actually bid 5♣ and complain that the 3♠ bidders sometimes miss a good slam?

Yes my bidding plan is basically to give up on slam unless partner has a superperfect maximum where he can bid keycard over 3♠ (he can jump to 4N directly, and I assume Mike's partner could do the same), but so what?

[Guest Jlall]

Adam, I don't understand your point about Qx of hearts. Why would partner think Qx of hearts is a useful slam card when he has xxx Qx Kx AKQxxx? If partner is not an idiot he can see that if we have a spade loser then Qx of hearts does not pull much weight at all since partner will have both red aces plus some more. It will be of some use when partner has AJ AJ in the reds, but useless when partner is AK A or A AQ in the reds. Assuming partner is not an idiot he will think "having the HQ for slam purposes is better than not having the HQ, but I would rather have the DQ." Partner can easily figure out that xxx x KQx AKQxxx is a MUCH stronger hand since slam is cold opposite 2 aces and out when he has that hand. Hopefully partner's thinking is better than "Qx of partner's suit, thats a good holding!" or "stiff in partner's suit is bad!" Partner can also figure out that for slam purposes having only 5 clubs is usually much worse than having 6 clubs. Partner can also figure out that the weaker his diamond holding, the more important the HQ can become (for pitching diamonds). Partner should like xxx Kx Qx AKQxxx a lot more than xxx Qx Kx AKQxxx. It seems like partner will evaluate pretty well.