Annoying hand

[ArtK78]

Playing a weak NT nonvul in 1st and 2nd seat, I held this hand in third seat:

 

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

1NT* - (P) - 2♠** - (x)

3♣*** - (P) - ?[/hv]

 

1NT was 11-14.

2♠ was a transfer to clubs.

3♣ showed a top honor in clubs, but did not promise more than 2 clubs.

 

Holding Qx in spades and hearing the double to my left was incredibly annoying.

 

Do you have any plan of attack at this point?

[pooltuna]

Playing a weak NT nonvul in 1st and 2nd seat, I held this hand in third seat:

 

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

1NT* - (P) - 2♠** - (x)

3♣*** - (P) - ?[/hv]

 

1NT was 11-14.

2♠ was a transfer to clubs.

3♣ showed a top honor in clubs, but did not promise more than 2 clubs.

 

Holding Qx in spades and hearing the double to my left was incredibly annoying.

 

Do you have any plan of attack at this point?

too much bidding!!!! just raise to 6NT over 1NT ;)

[jjbrr]

Playing a weak NT nonvul in 1st and 2nd seat, I held this hand in third seat:

 

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

1NT* - (P) - 2♠** - (x)

3♣*** - (P) - ?[/hv]

 

1NT was 11-14.

2♠ was a transfer to clubs.

3♣ showed a top honor in clubs, but did not promise more than 2 clubs.

 

Holding Qx in spades and hearing the double to my left was incredibly annoying.

 

Do you have any plan of attack at this point?

too much bidding!!!! just raise to 6NT over 1NT :ph34r:

I'm not ready to give up on grand yet. Axxx Qxx Kxxx Kx isnt so bad for 13 tricks.

 

I assume 3♦ would be short? I assume you have no agreement of pass/rdbl/3♣ after the double?

[ArtK78]

Unfortunately, we had no agreement about the distinction between pass/xx/3♣ over the double. I assumed the same as if there had been no double - top honor in clubs, length indeterminate.

 

While I have an agreement with one partner that a suit bid by me over 3♣ shows shortness, I had not discussed it with this partner and I am sure that he would take a new suit bid as a cue bid (in fact, I bid 3♦ over 3♣ and he did take it as a cue bid).

 

So, armed with that information, how do you proceed?

 

By the way, if a new suit by me would be shortness, how do you proceed?

[helene_t]

If I can't show 5-4 minors because 3♦ doesn't show diamonds, and opener can't show 3-card club support, then I agree with Pooltuna.

 

I am not saying the system is bad, I think punting 6NT with this hand is ok and showing shortness after the transfer helps with many other hands.

[dake50]

Missing DKJ +HQJ +SAKJ (and lead-direct over my SQ).

Partner's 11-14 needs 2 of SA, SK, DK with his CK for slam?

Maybe, but he sees those after I show strong.

Changed my mind about slam forcing.

[mikeh]

I don't see any answer to this problem, other than to embark upon a series of guesses, hope to land on our feet, and remember to either change methods altogether, or change the meaning of 3♣...surely we can use pass/redouble/2N or 3♣ to far better effect than this....or to agree that 3♦ (rather than 3M) is natural and forcing....tho whether this is better than shortness is an open question for me.

 

I'd start my stumbling with an ambiguous 3♦, altho there is an ethical issue lurking if we can hear/see partner's alert or non-alert.

 

I am hoping he can bid some number of notrump, over which I can maybe bid 5N to offer a choice of slams...if he has Axx in spades and Kxx in clubs, we'll play clubs. We might even stumble into diamonds if he has 5 of them and only 2 clubs...he might offer 6♦.

 

If he doesn't bid 3N...say he bids 3♥....is 3♠ a cue or a last chance to reach 3N bid? My take is that once you start cuebidding, every non-trump suit bid is a cuebid.

 

So I think I'd raise the heart cue to 4 and see what happens next. Nothing good, I imagine.

[gordontd]

This sounds like an unfortunate combination of agreements, if you can't find out whether partner has support and you can't bid your second suit naturally. What would an immediate 3C response show?

[Free]

First of all, you should have agreements that 3♣ either shows or denies a ♠ stopper. I have similar agreements, and over 1NT-2♠-(Dbl) we play:

pass = shows stopper, you can RDbl to ask again

RDbl = shows a stopper but no need to rightside a ♣ contract (so the Ace or KQx)

Immediate calls deny a ♠ stopper

 

Secondly, you need a way to show minor 2-suiters / balanced hands, or ask about opener's hand. If you can just transfer and bid a second suit, you don't have a problem.

[gszeszycki]

with 32-35 combined hcp general range is 6n with or w/o the 2s x the Qx is a quandary. I would bid 3s (even if it showed shortness) because we cannot make even 6 if P not have spade stop (surely with JT9x they would NOT consider 3n sinc the rest of their hand is golden opposite a short spade). If P manages a 3n call at least you now know it's safe to play at least 6---and you should be able to safely bid 4c to now show slam interest if p cannot bid 3n you should probably bid 5c and HOPE its not a disaster--the only foreseeable problem with this bidding is if p can JUMP to 6c with 14 count and 2 or 3 small spades then i would not recommend showing shortness and bidding would be a challenge given your current methods

[jdonn]

It's a system fix in the sense that I think it's very bad to have to start with a transfer to a minor on a 5 card suit.

[ArtK78]

It is a system fix in that, at least theoretically, slam in clubs and in notrump cannot be made if partner is declaring. 6♦, on the other hand, is cold from either side.

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=saxhjxxxdkjxxxckx&s=sqxhakdaqxxcaqxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

The hand that doubled 2♠ held the KJ long of spades, so an opening spade lead beats both 6♣ and 6NT as clubs are 4-2.

 

A direct leap to 6NT might win the day, as RHO has no obvious reason to lead a spade.

 

6♦ is cold from either side, but we had no way to find diamonds after a transfer to clubs.

 

Our opponents played 6NT from my side after a 1♦ opening. So they won the hand purely by the luck of the location of the opponents' spade honors.

 

I am definitely going to rethink these methods. They work ok for partials and games, but they are definitely deficient for slam exploration.

[mikeh]

at the risk of incurring the disdain of the transfers-are-supreme school: forcing stayman makes this hand a slam-dunk, so to speak.

 

1N  2♦

3♣  3♦

3♠   off to the races

 

2♦  most game forces....including all complex hand gf

3♣:  5+ diamonds

3♦:  sets trump, and suggests exploration

3♠  spade cue

 

The key is the transfer response structure (I have posted a full explanation elsewhere, but am happy to provide full details). It is great for slam bidding opposite a weak 1N, since it maximizes the odds of responder becoming declarer, which sometimes matters, and allows setting trump in all cases below 3N.

 

I don't use it over strong 1N for two reasons: the lesser one is that one doesn't need to worry about right-siding very often, and the main one is that playing weak notrump, opener has relatively little to show, so having responder captain, with the bigger, more complex hand, lends itself to efficiency. This factor is not present with strong notrump hands where it will often be important for responder to describe his hand.

[Cyberyeti]

We play that 2S is weak with one minor or GF and slam interested with both at least 5-4, so:

 

1N-2S-2N = default over this 3H = longer clubs, 3S = longer D etc

1N-2S-3C = 4+D

1N-2S-3D = 5+C

 

So we would kick off with 3C showing D, and the auction would proceed 3H-3S-4C-4H(Keycard)-4S(0/3)-4N(QD?)-5H(Yes and KH)-6C(KC not KS and all keycards)-7D

 

7D would seem to be able to cope with trumps 3-1 and clubs 4-2 and is only really bad if the 1N opener only has 2 hearts and 4 diamonds.

[ArtK78]

at the risk of incurring the disdain of the transfers-are-supreme school: forcing stayman makes this hand a slam-dunk, so to speak.

 

1N  2♦

3♣  3♦

3♠   off to the races

 

2♦  most game forces....including all complex hand gf

3♣:  5+ diamonds

3♦:  sets trump, and suggests exploration

3♠  spade cue

 

The key is the transfer response structure (I have posted a full explanation elsewhere, but am happy to provide full details). It is great for slam bidding opposite a weak 1N, since it maximizes the odds of responder becoming declarer, which sometimes matters, and allows setting trump in all cases below 3N.

 

I don't use it over strong 1N for two reasons: the lesser one is that one doesn't need to worry about right-siding very often, and the main one is that playing weak notrump, opener has relatively little to show, so having responder captain, with the bigger, more complex hand, lends itself to efficiency. This factor is not present with strong notrump hands where it will often be important for responder to describe his hand.

Mike:

 

I would be interested in seeing your structure. Please provide a copy or a link to where it is already posted.

 

I play 2-way Stayman over 10-12 NT openings. I have posted the structure here before (it is a structure played by Soloway and Goldman over their mini-NT). Your structure may be similar, but I would like to review it.

 

Thanks.

[the hog]

I would bid 3D here. A trump suit has not been agreed, so this should be natural and forcing.

[mike777]

Playing a weak NT nonvul in 1st and 2nd seat, I held this hand in third seat:

 

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

1NT* - (P) - 2♠** - (x)

3♣*** - (P) - ?[/hv]

 

1NT was 11-14.

2♠ was a transfer to clubs.

3♣ showed a top honor in clubs, but did not promise more than 2 clubs.

 

Holding Qx in spades and hearing the double to my left was incredibly annoying.

 

Do you have any plan of attack at this point?

show both minors...no....ok....6nt

 

 

next hand...