non-goulash, ACBL June 6, 2009

[inquiry]

Just one more wild hand, this one from this month on BBO.

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sqj9h865dq9765c65&s=sakt752ha4dakt83c]133|200|Scoring: XIMP

Three passes to South, your auction to whatever contract you would like to play?

 

How about after two passes and RHO opens 3♣?

 

11 out of 49 found 6♠, 9 out of 49 found 6♦, no one bid any kind of grand. [/hv]

[gnasher]

  1♠-2♠

  3♦-4♠

  6♠

(4♠ accepts the game try but is discouraging opposite a slam try)

One problem with combining game tries and slam tries in the same bid is that responder doesn't know what's expected of him. Here, if 3♦ was a game try he wants to get to game without further leakage of information, but that doesn't work so well if opener has a slam try.

 

I play that 3NT over 3♦ shows a hand that wants to accept the game try, allowing room for opener to make slam tries if that's what he has in mind, but it would show more slam-suitability than this.

 

  (3♣)

  dbl 3♦

  4♣ 4♦

  5♣ 5♦

  5♥ 5♠

  7♦

4♣ was just a good hand, but 5♣ must agree diamonds. 5♠ is a bit questionable, but advancer has quite a good hand and hasn't shown anything yet.

[Fluffy]

1♠-1Nt

3♦-4♠

5♣-5♦*

6♠-p

 

I love Andy's approach after 3 clubs opening, really letting partner bid diamonds naturarilly its the key

[inquiry]

1♠-1Nt

3♦-4♠

5♣-5♦*

6♠-p

 

I love Andy's approach after 3 clubs opening, really letting partner bid diamonds naturarilly its the key

You are correct about the secret to this hand, in that no one who opened 1S found diamonds as a strain. Those who played in diamonds, did so after the 3♣ opening bid.

 

The problem seemed to be that after opening 1♠ and finding the major fit, noone seemed able to find the huge diamond fit anymore.

[nick_s]

  1♠-2♠

  3♦-4♠

  6♠

(4♠ accepts the game try but is discouraging opposite a slam try)

One problem with combining game tries and slam tries in the same bid is that responder doesn't know what's expected of him. Here, if 3♦ was a game try he wants to get to game without further leakage of information, but that doesn't work so well if opener has a slam try.

 

I play that 3NT over 3♦ shows a hand that wants to accept the game try, allowing room for opener to make slam tries if that's what he has in mind, but it would show more slam-suitability than this.

That sounds like a useful treatment.

 

This particular problem makes me wonder what 4♦ instead of 4♠ (or 3NT) should show.

[gnasher]

This particular problem makes me wonder what 4♦ instead of 4♠ (or 3NT) should show.

In theory I play it as a better hand with diamond support, but in practice I just don't bid it.

 

Any time that responder gives does something informative in case opener is making a slam try, he helps the opponents with the lead on all the hands where opener was making only a game try.

[Echognome]

A possible auction:

 

P - 1♠;

2♠ - 3♦;

4♦ - 5NT;

6♦ - 7♦

 

I think if responder is going to accept the invite, why not show why he is accepting by bidding 4♦? 4♠ can be bid on a variety of accepts and does not show the nature of the hand.

 

Another possible auction:

 

P - 1♠;

2♠ - 3♦;

3♠ - 4♦;

5♦ - 5NT;

6♦ - Pass

 

If responder takes a less rosy view, you can at least get to the better strain.

[Echognome]

Any time that responder gives does something informative in case opener is making a slam try, he helps the opponents with the lead on all the hands where opener was making only a game try.

Of course by that argument, why doesn't opener just bid 6♠ over 2♠?

[gnasher]

Of course by that argument, why doesn't opener just bid 6♠ over 2♠?

The argument I was trying to make was that you shouldn't give away information that isn't needed for a game-vs-partscore decision, because of a 1% chance that it's a slam-vs-game decision.

 

That's slightly different from the question of whether, from opener's point of view, 6♠ might have better chances if he bids it directly over 2♠. The direct route might gain if LHO leads a diamond, picking up the suit for us. Against that, 3♦ might get us to a good grand slam.

 

The difference is that opener after 1♠-2♠ knows that there's a fair chance of a grand slam, whereas responder after 1♠-2♠;3♦ has no reason to think that there's a small slam.