i thought this never happened

[karlson]

♠-- ♥Q ♦AKxxx ♣AQJxxxx

 

1♠-p-p to you, w/r at imps.

[TylerE]

2N then 6♣.

[Jlall]

2N then 6♣.

lol 2N does not show the minors

[PFormaini]

♠-- ♥Q ♦AKxxx ♣AQJxxxx

 

1♠-p-p to you, w/r at imps.

Double -

 

Then bid Clubs ONCE and Diamonds TWICE - if possible. Or, if one has a bid to show a strong minor 2-suiter, use it.

 

It all comes down to partnership agreement and System. There is no 'correct' answer.

[jeffford76]

This is why not to play Michaels in balancing seat. 2S now -- any big hand that wouldn't want a double to be passed for penalty, then you can start bidding your suits on the next round.

[Apollo81]

I would double and hope partner doesn't bid hearts at the 5-level or higher after I correct to clubs. Second choice = blast 5♣.

[Echognome]

I would think 4NT would be interpreted either as minors or a big 2-suiter.

 

Edit: That being said, I wouldn't like the call with a 2-card discrepancy.

[gwnn]

5♣.

 

there ain't no mountain high enough

there ain't no valley low enough (say it again)

there ain't no river wide enough

 

to x on a singleton ♥ here

 

(almost)

[jdonn]

2♣, then hopefully diamonds, then hopefully clubs. Partner will get the message. No I'm not that worried this gets passed out, in fact I expect a lot more bidding. And if it does who's to say it's not right, since in that case partner has a ton of spades and it could be the granddaddy of misfits.

[gnasher]

4♠. Both minors with first-round spade control. What else could it mean?

[Echognome]

4♠.  Both minors with first-round spade control.  What else could it mean?

It could mean "I have 7 good spades and I don't care that my LHO has 5 bad ones."

 

I'm not saying that's how it will be interpreted or if it's useful to have that meaning, but it's certainly a viable one.

 

Edit: Except for W/R where it would be silly to have it mean that. Oops! R/W maybe.

[jdonn]

How about "both minors without saying anything about first round spade control"?

 

How about natural (I know that would be goofy at this vul, but it makes sense at others and I don't want to switch for each vul).

 

How about a super strong hand with just hearts and first round spade control?

 

Or the same but with hearts and a minor?

[eyhung]

Agree with Josh's plan -- hard to see that the bidding will die when you hold 1 major-suit card (and if it does, it's likely a good stop in a misfit). It is like ju-jitsu, you are using the opponents and their majors against them to gain a "forcing" natural bid.

[Codo]

if your system forbids you to bid 2 NT with this hand (mine does not), simply follow Joshs plan. There are 25 major cards and 24 HCPS out there. This will never ever been passed out.

[Old York]

if your system forbids you to bid 2 NT with this hand (mine does not), simply follow Joshs plan. There are 25 major cards and 24 HCPS out there. This will never ever been passed out.

Oh yes it would.... I pass now and pass quickly.

 

I cannot wait to see dummy, and the complete hand.

 

This is a very dangerous auction, partner probably has spades, and opponents probably have a massive heart fit.

If I bid now, they will always find their hearts, and a xruff will ensue. they could easily make a heart game, with no guarantee of a good fit for our side :lol:

The lure of a minor suit slam could easily be an illusion. Why sacrifice at the 5/6 level when passing now could net a good profit?

 

2NT in protective seat is not UNT, it is natural - usually showing 17-18 or better

 

Tony

[the hog]

if your system forbids you to bid 2 NT with this hand (mine does not), simply follow Joshs plan. There are 25 major cards and 24 HCPS out there. This will never ever been passed out.

Oh yes it would.... I pass now and pass quickly.

 

snipped

 

Tony

Do you think they will find their Heart fit over 4NT or 5C?

[Old York]

Do you think they will find their Heart fit over 4NT or 5C?

Both these bids could work well, I agree totally

 

But there is a danger that any minor suit game/slam could fail if dummy has wasted values in the majors, which imho seems fairly likely

 

Hope to see the complete hand soon

 

Tony

[karlson]

I'm not going to predict exactly how the auction will go over x or 2c, but you will probably have a reasonable auction.

 

You can try one other easy quiz on this hand though. Say you balance with 4n and it goes p 6c p. Kick it in?

 

Full hand:

[hv=n=saxxhaxxxdxxcktxx&w=skqtxxxhkjtxxdqjc&e=sjxxxhxxxdtxxxcxx&s=shqdakxxxcaqjxxxx]399|300|[/hv]

[Old York]

Wow!

 

Your extreme good fortune is almost unbelievable, partner had the perfect hand.

The last time I played this hand this was the layout.....

 

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=skjt872hj3d763ct8&w=saq964ha9542dqck7&e=s53hkt876djt94c53&s=shqdak852caqj9642]399|300|Scoring: IMP

Played on Fantasy Island[/hv]

 

Tony :lol:

[eyhung]

I think you are grossly overestimating the downside of bidding. It's true that there are some pathological layouts where you will regret having reopened the bidding. But I think it's ridiculously anti-percentage to pass it out in 1S when you are seven-five, at favorable vul so the opponents can't save effectively, and you hold 14 of the working 24 HCP.

[Old York]

I was just trying to show the other side of the coin. There are real risks here.

However, I think that I would probably bid 4♣ Natural

 

With a useful trick, my partner would raise, and I might even get doubled

 

Tony

[gnasher]

I didn't mean "What else could it be if we decided to agree upon a meaning?", but "What else could it mean playing fairly standard methods without specific agreement about this bid?"

How about "both minors without saying anything about first round spade control"?

If we accept that both 4NT and 4♠ show the minors, I think it's normal for 4♠ to show spade control.

 

A possible alternative is that 4♠ shows both minors with strong slam interest, 4NT is weaker, and neither says anything specific about spade control. If partner is certain that I have a slam try in the minors, but uncertain about what I've shown in spades, I can live with it.

How about natural (I know that would be goofy at this vul, but it makes sense at others and I don't want to switch for each vul).

I doubt if I'm going to want to bid this often enough to justify forming an agreement about it. I'm happy to conclude that at this vulnerability it's not natural, and to not worry about the question of whether it means the same at other vulnerabilities.

How about a super strong hand with just hearts and first round spade control?

For most of us, there aren't any analogous situations where a four-level cue-bid shows a one-suiter. If there were, this might, I suppose, be a possibility. Otherwise, presumably a strong one-suiter would always be introduced via the standard methods of double-and-jump, double-and-cuebid, or 3♠-and-move.

Or the same but with hearts and a minor?

Wouldn't you bid 2♠ with that and then keep making forcing bids? I can't see how wasting two levels of bidding is going to help with slam investigations.

 

 

Nobody would choose an undiscussed double-jump cue bid when there's a descriptive alternative. The point about using it for both minors with first-round spade control is that there isn't a descriptive alternative - I don't think 4NT promises spade control.

[PrecisionL]

Hmmm, I thought 2NT in balancing sheet showed natural, balanced and 19-21 hcp. With good 15 to 18 double and then bid NT.

[Codo]

2 NT shows whatever you have agreed that it shows.

I have no idea what mainstream is, so I would never use it with an unknown partner.

 

And please show me a scenario where you can bid X and then 1 NT after they opened 1 ♠.... Okay, one of them redoubled or someone accept an insufficent bid. Not very likely that you can show 15-18 in your system.

[hanp]

If we accept that both 4NT and 4♠ show the minors, I think it's normal for 4♠ to show spade control.

I think that it is normal for 4S to show a better hand than 4NT, and say nothing about a spade control. I would for example texpect that my pick up partner assumes this for (2S) - 4S and (2S) - 4NT