Rock Crusher

[Echognome]

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=saqjt9642hk7dcakt]133|100|Scoring: IMP

2♦* - (2♥) - ?[/hv]

*Natural, weak 2 in diamonds

 

What's our gameplan?

[han]

I'd bid 4S, very unlikely partner has what I need for slam and I don't have a good way to find out anyway.

[rogerclee]

If 2S is forcing I don't see any reason not to start with that given that we are w/r and I'm not scared of the opps bidding something. I don't think slam is all that unlikely.

[han]

I assumed 2S was non-forcing when I posted, not sure if that is standard or not. I would definitely assume that 2D - (dbl) - 2S is NF. If 2S is NF then perhaps 3S should be natural and gameforcing but I have never discussed it so I doubt a sensible auction to slam will follow.

[rogerclee]

I always assumed forcing was standard, as I would assume 2D p 2S is. I think 2D X 2S is different because you can start with a redouble with a strong hand, and because there is now danger of playing in 2D X when it is undesirable.

[hotShot]

4♠, partners ♦ values are wasted, So I don't think slam is possible.

[han]

Of course slam is possible, partner needs the spade king and either the diamond ace or the club queen. That's more than possible. (I actually know partner's hand but I've tried to forget about that)

[rogerclee]

A doubleton club would also do the trick.

[Codo]

4 ♠ can win in many ways (They double because of their zillion HCPS, we find the right spot and makes it difficult to them to judge.)

SO I take the risk in missing the possible slam.

[fan13027]

It's actually very easy to explore for slam. I start by using Ogust 2NT response. If partner rebids with 3NT (telling me they have a solid ♦ suit) I can continue to explore for slam using Gerber (4♣), any other rebid from partner and I sign off with 4♠.

 

Of course if he rebids 3NT, it's not likely he will also be holding the A♥ or K♠ (or any other honor that could help me) because then he would likely hold too many HCP to be opening weak anyway. But none the less, the mechanism to explore is there.

 

Worst case scenario by carrying on with Gerber to ask for kings is that you end up with a contract of 5♠ which is quite likely makeable if you end up being declarer and the opening lead comes from your left hand opponent. In fact, if you look at potential responses to Gerber (assuming partner does not have both aces - a reasonable assumption as explained above) then the only way partner can become declarer is if he responds 5♠ (indicating 2 kings) to your 5♣ king query -- in which case he has the necessary K♠ to consider at least small slam.

[pclayton]

It's actually very easy to explore for slam. I start by using Ogust 2NT response. If partner rebids with 3NT (telling me they have a solid ♦ suit) I can continue to explore for slam using Gerber (4♣), any other rebid from partner and I sign off with 4♠.

 

Of course if he rebids 3NT, it's not likely he will also be holding the A♥ or K♠ (or any other honor that could help me) because then he would likely hold too many HCP to be opening weak anyway. But none the less, the mechanism to explore is there.

 

Worst case scenario by carrying on with Gerber to ask for kings is that you end up with a contract of 5♠ which is quite likely makeable if you end up being declarer and the opening lead comes from your left hand opponent. In fact, if you look at potential responses to Gerber (assuming partner does not have both aces - a reasonable assumption as explained above) then the only way partner can become declarer is if he responds 5♠ (indicating 2 kings) to your 5♣ king query -- in which case he has the necessary K♠ to consider at least small slam.

I will pray for your soul Fan13027.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

Depends on method.

 

With no discussion, my guess would be,

that X is penalty, 2S is nonforcing, 2NT

natural, 3S ... no idea.

 

In this scenario I would go with 4S.

 

Assuming I have more methods available,

I would try to set spades in a forcing way,

and depening on how partner reacts explore

6S.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Echognome]

[hv=d=n&v=e&n=s3hat3dt96432cqj5&w=sk75h84dq875c9432&e=s8hqj9652dakjc876&s=saqjt9642hk7dcakt]399|300|Scoring: IMP

Table 1:

2♦ - 2♥ - 4♠ - All Pass

 

Table 2:

P - 1♥ - Dbl - P

2♦ - P - 2♥ - P

3♥ - P - 3♠ - P

3NT - P - 4♣ - P

4♦ - P - 4♥ - P

5♣ - P - 6♠ - Dbl

All Pass[/hv]

 

I was at table 1 and opened 2♦. I completely agree with my partner's 4♠ bid. I asked him later if he felt that 2♦ was wrong with all the values outside and he did not think so. It just happened that the hands meshed well.

 

At the other table, I do not believe they were playing a natural weak 2♦ (but I will let Phil confirm) and they made there way to the very good slam.

[pclayton]

[hv=d=n&v=e&n=s3hat3dt96432cqj5&w=sk75h84dq875c9432&e=s8hqj9652dakjc876&s=saqjt9642hk7dcakt]399|300|Scoring: IMP

Table 1:

2♦ - 2♥ - 4♠ - All Pass

 

Table 2:

P - 1♥ - Dbl - P

2♦ - P - 2♥ - P

3♥ - P - 3♠ - P

3NT - P - 4♣ - P

4♦ - P - 4♥ - P

5♣ - P - 6♠ - Dbl

All Pass[/hv]

 

I was at table 1 and opened 2♦. I completely agree with my partner's 4♠ bid. I asked him later if he felt that 2♦ was wrong with all the values outside and he did not think so. It just happened that the hands meshed well.

 

At the other table, I do not believe they were playing a natural weak 2♦ (but I will let Phil confirm) and they made there way to the very good slam.

We play a weak 2♦ opener.

 

I'm not fond of 2♦ with a suit like this even at favorable, but I also recognize its a style thing.

 

I liked our auction, but I thought Dayou should have bid 4♥ instead of 4♦.

[Echognome]

Phil,

 

I actually don't really understand your auction all that well. It seems that you two were on very different wavelengths. You doubled, then cue-bid. What is Dayou's 3♥ bid? Did he think 2♥ agreed diamonds, or was he just making a general GF after your cuebid. Both his 4♦ and 5♣ bid indicate that he still thinks strain is in doubt, because he doesn't have a cuebid anyway that I see normally played.

 

I'm certainly not arguing that these are easy hands to bid, but what's wrong with 3♠ over 2♦? Doesn't this show a great hand and a great spade suit?

[han]

I find it peculiar that you say you completely agree with your partner's 4S.

[pclayton]

Phil,

 

I actually don't really understand your auction all that well.  It seems that you two were on very different wavelengths.  You doubled, then cue-bid.  What is Dayou's 3♥ bid?  Did he think 2♥ agreed diamonds, or was he just making a general GF after your cuebid.  Both his 4♦ and 5♣ bid indicate that he still thinks strain is in doubt, because he doesn't have a cuebid anyway that I see normally played.

 

I'm certainly not arguing that these are easy hands to bid, but what's wrong with 3♠ over 2♦?  Doesn't this show a great hand and a great spade suit?

We had a long discussion about this.

 

He thought 3♥ promised a control, and I was convinced it did not. How elese would you bid AKJxx of diamonds for instance? He did not think 2♥ agreed diamonds.

 

4♦ is a confused bid, but 5♣ seems like a reasonable 'grope'.

 

As far as 3♠ is concerned, I think we've discussed this around here, and the consensus was that it was not-forcing. I agree that if its forcing, it's ideal, but why would you risk a call like this in an important match?

[Echognome]

I find it peculiar that you say you completely agree with your partner's 4S.

Why? Would it have been more interesting to post my hand and say "Is this a 2♦ opener for you?"

 

Obviously it's a combination of style and judgment that lead one table into game and the other into slam. Jason and I play an aggressive style, so it makes sense that we will sometimes miss slam (even if we played a conservative style this is possible). Dayou judged it differently.

 

I don't post hands solely for the purpose of finding out whether I think partner (or myself) has made a mistake. I often just post hands to generate some discussion and determine whether a hand that "slipped through the cracks" was because our system was bad, our judgment was bad, or was just one of those things that you accept will happen on occasion.

[whereagles]

4♠ is rather obvious. Pard just happens to have a weak 2 that's against the odds.

[Cascade]

4♠ is fine but I would prefer a lower level forcing bid in spades - 2♠ or 3♠ if it is forcing and natural.

[benlessard]

2D is normal for us, 4S is a slightly lazy bid.

 

I think that 2Nt followed by 4S is saying that you were looking for all around strenght (meaning D arent wasted values) and that 3S followed by 4S would suggest D shortage but that S support might be important.

 

This is of course assuming that 3S is forcing and that ogust followed by a jump isnt a splinter or whatever.

 

I still dont think ill be able to reach 6S.

[whereagles]

2D is normal for us, 4S is a slightly lazy bid.

 

I think that 2Nt followed by 4S is saying that you were looking for all around strenght

One thing is being lazy, the other is being practical and realize there's no way to bid 6 with confidence. The suggestion you present is fine, but has two problems:

 

1. Is pard on the same wavelenght as to what 2N + 4♠ is? Are you sure he won't take that as some sort of splinter/voidwood/whatnot?

 

2. Even if pard is in the same wavelength, the decision is being passed to a hand which is weak and hence has no clue whether his side values fit (if they exist).

 

It's never as easy as we'd like it to be :)

[benlessard]

1. Is pard on the same wavelenght as to what 2N + 4♠ is? Are you sure he won't take that as some sort of splinter/voidwood/whatnot?

I have 8 spades in my hand so im pretty sure partner will not think its an exclusion bid.

 

Also using ogust with a void and GF values is pretty lame.

 

 

2. Even if pard is in the same wavelength, the decision is being passed to a hand which is weak and hence has no clue whether his side values fit (if they exist).

This doesnt hold, partner has limited values its easier for him to see if his values are working than the other way around.

 

2D----(X)------3S (single suiter GF)

3NT------------4C

4H--------------5C

???

 

I think all the bids are pretty obvious so far. 3Nt denied a fit, with no points in D 4H is pretty obvious. 5C is obvious too. Now depending the style of preempt opener might bid 6S because of the Q of clubs.

[the hog]

4S is fine. The 2D bid was not. End of story.