Why didnt we bid the slam?

[cherdanno]

Yes the east hand from the opening post opposite any 4333, 4432 or 5332. I did not include other shapes.

 

The numbers are double dummy.

 

However good the numbers look. The real question is can we do better.

Better than double dummy? E.g. by not telling them what to lead?

 

Btw, if you had this hand 100 times, do you really think you wouldn't miss a cold slam a single time by cuebidding? If you miss slam only once, you have already negated your gain from avoiding 4.6 slams off ♦AK. Same if you just go down once by telling them what to lead.

 

I guess your bidding is really superior to US expert bidding then, and you shouldn't keycard with this hand.

[rduran1216]

the responder's hand is worth 17 playing points in spades.

 

If you assume just the worst hand in life for the opener, say xx spades, QJx hearts, AKQJx, Qxx clubs, I still think you want to be there, on the chance you dont get a club lead. It is quite unlikely that this is your hand, simply replace the two Q's with the A of clubs or spades and you want to be there in spades.

 

Point is, if I look at the responder's hand I want to be there, because with just about any 15 points, I've got a shot at it, and its hard to even craft a hand where you are dead from the outset.

 

A majority of the time, 6S or 6NT is where you want to be with that hand.

 

So I would transfer to spades, and bid 6S, in the long run, its worth it.

[BillHiggin]

Confessions of an old fart

Sometimes we get a thought and do not think it all the way through. I was Jack's partner and must have just eaten a platter of sliders (i.e. became Whimpy). My first thought when he opened 1N was indeed - texas then RKC. But, I then focused on that diamond situation and got a bit too inventive. Why not bid the non existent club suit and see if he can cue diamonds.

 

Bad thinking: And if he cannot, then I will avoid a bad slam (oops, failure to cue does not deny the control, it simply means he feels his cards are wrong for a black suit slam, but old brains can get stuck in the wrong rut).

 

Clearly, I did not catch my faulty logic in time. I am busy writing "Do not invent new agreements at the table" 100 times.

[BillHiggin]

I see one idea in this thread that looks problematic:

That would be using a 3M response to 1N to set trumps and ask for cue bids. If responder has a hand where that seems a useful thing to do, then it really really needs to go through a transfer! He would not see that need if he did not hold an open suit, and that implies that the contract should be right sided via a transfer to protect a possible lonely king in opener's hand.

 

If a partnership feels the cue bid force is more important than the 1-3 majors, 4-5 minors slam try then there are a couple of ways to do it without wrongside issues.

1) Switch the game invite and the cue bid force (1N-3M as nat game invite but 1N-transfer then 3M as slamish).

2) Simply abandon the game invite with a 6 card major (responder either bids game or stops at 2). This allows you to keep the special (1-3)-(4-5) slam tries.

[aguahombre]

Bill, the concern about wrongsiding is a valid one. Transfers have the side effect of rightsiding, but that is not their only value. they allow more bids to happen because the one who transfers gets to bid again.

 

In the old (we still use it because we are old) Hardy/Walsh NT system, 1NT-3M was a broken suit slam try, and was frequently only a 5-card suit. the strain was not established and it did not demand cue bidding. But wrongsiding was not a big deal because with a broken suit and a slam try responder was not worried about having to be the declarer (had cards outside). In that style, Opener only cuebid in response to 3M with a fit and a filler in the major.

[gnasher]

1) Switch the game invite and the cue bid force (1N-3M as nat game invite but 1N-transfer then 3M as slamish).

That seems extremely unwise. Rightsiding matters at the game level too, Game hands are much more common than slam hands; also, the more points responder has, the less important it is for opener to play it.

 

2) Simply abandon the game invite with a 6 card major (responder either bids game or stops at 2). This allows you to keep the special (1-3)-(4-5) slam tries.

That also seems unwise. Game hands are still much more common than slam hands.

[ONEferBRID]

Bill.... what about the "false splinter " of 4C!-jump after the simple transfer ?

( see my Aug 30 reply ).

 

- - Don ( TWOferBRIDGE )

[jdeegan]

:( I haven't read all the thread's comments, but I think you blew it when you bid 4♠. The auction up to there was good, imho. Slam bidding is conversational. You know slam is possible, but far from certain. So, bid 4♥ over 3NT with the idea that after that you are pretty much done. If pard bids 4♠ you are done. If he bids 4NT, you bid 5♠. If he bids 5♣ (which he probably should) you cooperate with 5♥. After that pard has to bid 6 if you are to reach the slam.

[Chris2794]

Mhh.. i would bid Texas and than RCKB ;-)

 

With my Regular P i would beginn with Stayman :huh:

 

1NT 2♣

2♥ 2NT

3♣ 4♥

5♣ 6♠

 

2♣ = Stayman / Both Majors Weak / Asking for Distribution

2♥ = 4 ♥

2NT = Asking for Distribution

3♣ = 4♣

4♥ = RCKB ♠

5♣ = 2 -Q

[aguahombre]

Mhh.. i would bid Texas and than RCKB ;-)

 

With my Regular P i would beginn with Stayman :huh:

 

1NT          2♣

2♥        2NT

3♣        4♥

5♣        6♠

 

2♣ = Stayman / Both Majors Weak / Asking for Distribution

2♥ = 4 ♥

2NT = Asking for Distribution

3♣ = 4♣

4♥ = RCKB ♠

5♣ = 2 -Q

2NT asking for distribution? convenient for this hand. I doubt very many people will change their 1NT bidding structure.

[ONEferBRID]

[hv=d=w&v=e&w=sa7hqj96dk62caq97&e=skq10985hak5d98ck4]266|100|Scoring: IMP

1nt-2♥

2♠- 3♣

3NT- 4♠ [/hv]

 

Since Responder has slam intentions as well as the top dog suit, he can afford to make a "false 2nd suit" bid to find out more information from partner using this neat invention ( not mine, but I wish it were ). The 6 Ace RKC is my contribution :

 

1NT - 2♥!

2♠ - 3♣ (ostensibly showing a 2nd suit, GF )

3♦!* - 3♥ ( cue )

3♠ ( cue ) - 4♣ ( marking time )

4♦ ( cue ) - 4NT ( 6 Ace RKC, Sp & Cl )

5♠ ( 2 + 1Q ) - 6NT ( in case the Diam cue = K )

____________________________________________________________

* The complete convention ( by IanD ) after 3-minor rebid by Responder :

3M = 3 cd support for the major, no 4 cd support for the minor

3-new suit!(♦) = 4 cd support for the minor(♣),slammish, only 2 cds Major(♠)

3NT = 2M/poor hand for minor slam

4-minor! = 3 cd M support AND 4 cds minor support

_____________________________________________________________

Actually, there is no need for RKC.

You have heard the cues you needed.

Opener must have working Queens for his bid.

And even if he doesn't have the ♣A, he would have to

have the ♦A for his count, sooo

just bid 6NT after the 4D cue.

Edited September 19, 2009 by ONEferBRID

[mike777]

[hv=d=w&v=e&w=sa7hqj96dk62caq97&e=skq10985hak5d98ck4]266|100|Scoring: IMP

1nt-2♥

2♠- 3♣

3NT- 4♠ [/hv]

 

This hand came up on BBO yesterday. We were playing Texas, normal transfers and 3M 3154 as per BBO Adv. I held the opening 1NT hand. We had no agreement on what 3♦ would mean after 3♣ but normally I would like it to mean agreeing spades and a control. Why didnt we bid the slam?

ok ok ok/.I miss simple texas and then rkc.........simplistic....

[csdenmark]

[hv=d=w&v=e&w=sa7hqj96dk62caq97&e=skq10985hak5d98ck4]266|100|Scoring: IMP

1nt-2♥

2♠- 3♣

3NT- 4♠ [/hv]

 

This hand came up on BBO yesterday.  We were playing Texas, normal transfers and 3M 3154 as per BBO Adv.  I held the opening 1NT hand. We had no agreement on what 3♦ would mean after 3♣ but normally I would like it to mean agreeing spades and a control.  Why didnt we bid the slam?

In my preferred methods responders first bid must be Game Forcing. 2-level transfers are rarely so.

 

In this auction responder may bid whatever he wants to except 4♠ which can be misunderstood as end.

[Chris2794]

Yes .. 2NT asking for distr.

 

becaus if yo are INV you have 4spade (or 4 heart ;-)), than you bid 2S (only forcing if opener has 4c spade) or if you are GF 2NT

[junyi_zhu]

[hv=d=w&v=e&w=sa7hqj96dk62caq97&e=skq10985hak5d98ck4]266|100|Scoring: IMP

1nt-2♥

2♠- 3♣

3NT- 4♠ [/hv]

 

This hand came up on BBO yesterday. We were playing Texas, normal transfers and 3M 3154 as per BBO Adv. I held the opening 1NT hand. We had no agreement on what 3♦ would mean after 3♣ but normally I would like it to mean agreeing spades and a control. Why didnt we bid the slam?

It's usually a good idea to equip a gadget in one's system to set up a trump and

force to game at 3 level or lower. Certainly the standard treatment in North America is quite bad.

[Lobowolf]

I suppose right siding it might with my xx... (Is that what you meant?)

DING DING DING (that is what he meant).

LoL. Maybe right-siding the contract is too old-fashioned?

The hand is misprinted. Opener's minors were actually:

 

♦AKQ

♣9762

 

 

After the contract was right-sided, an opening lead through the ♣Kx scuttled it.

[barryallen]

I disagree with most and think west has a bid part of the blame.

 

Partner showed clubs with 3 clubs, and you failed to raise him because you though 3♦ was something conventional that you can show with 3♠ instead.

 

Next he showed a slam interest hand with 6 spades, and you have ♠Ax, ♣AQ9x in his suits!. Passing was very bad judgement IMO.

I agree.

 

I don't really understand the 3♣ bid.

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the 3♣ bid, a subsequent 4♥ bid over 3NT should make this relatively easy?

[Jlall]

I suppose right siding it might with my xx... (Is that what you meant?)

DING DING DING (that is what he meant).

LoL. Maybe right-siding the contract is too old-fashioned?

The hand is misprinted. Opener's minors were actually:

 

♦AKQ

♣9762

 

 

After the contract was right-sided, an opening lead through the ♣Kx scuttled it.

It is obviously possible to be necessary to play from your side but surely you can see it's much more likely that it's necessary to play from partners side.