Problems with Queens

[Valardent]

Hi,

 

I recently conclude the relay honnor location structure I was working on for some months now.

 

Pretty satisfying altough one always have some bad cases.

 

One of these presented itself on this board :

 

Axxx Kx

AQxx Kx

Kxx AJT8x

AQ Kxxx

 

It went :

 

1♦* 1NT*

 

... 5♦ : 4432, 19-20 hcp, seven 1-2 points and 2 unknown queens

 

5♥ asks for queens on the base of the following (length ♥♠♦♣)scheme :

5♠ : if one queen = ♥Q, if 3 = all but ♥Q

5NT : if one queen = ♠Q, if 3 ....

and so on.

 

With 1 or 3 queens, no problems for relayer deducing tx to hcp points count

 

But with 2 queens, the scheme works on the crash principle :

5♠ c, 5NT r, 6♣sh

 

So, ambiguity remains bcs relayer hasn't got any queens.

 

Questions are :

 

Is it worth playing another method than crash (that could take more than 3 steps I presume) to gain in precision (space is often limited in my relaying method structure) or is it better to keep the crash method bcs boards where ambiguity happens are too few and far between and anticipating such a problem can sometimes be resolved by switching to natural bidding?

 

Any suggestion of a space-saving method resolving the ambiguity?

 

Tx for your comments.

 

Patrick

[shevek]

I think your method is pretty good. There are some hands that escape complete resolution, this is one. Note that the same hand with ♦AQx instead is nearly 3 times as common so East might bash 7♦.

It would be good if West's shape & strength came out a few steps lower.

[bhtf]

very interesting, very

was thinking about same

[Crunch3nt]

Agree no method perfect and this does seem pretty good.

 

We try to solve this problem by having two types of relay asks. 1) Std symmetric DCB style, and 2) An encoded type where Kings and queens are shown as either 1 or other 2 similar to here.

 

So if shape is out at say 3D, then 3H relays method 1, and 3S relays method 2. The key, of course, is that the hand asking knows whether they can decode the answers or not and can select method as appropriate.

 

A couple of other points. 1) Here the strong hand is being asked by the weak hand - never ideal. My system (not a big club either) suffers from the same problem :-) 2) I totally agree with Shevek's point about getting exact shape etc out lower. It is a constant battle, but the lower the better - especially for balanced shapes because they are so common.

[benlessard]

The Q of trumps is a too important card to be considered like a regular queen.

 

Finish your shape lower and having unclear hcp is much much better than having exact hcp but being higher.

 

Much easier to relay unbalanced hand than a balanced one.

[Crunch3nt]

"The Q of trumps is a too important card to be considered like a regular queen. " - Agree but in this example (and indeed most hands), you don't know what trumps are. We tried adding a control (using A2, K1) for the Queen of the shower's 5+ suits, which sounded cool in theory, but we found didn't gain in practice.

 

"Finish your shape lower and having unclear hcp is much much better than having exact hcp but being higher" - Totally Agree

 

"Much easier to relay unbalanced hand than a balanced one." - Totally agree, but not relevant here as both hands are balanced.

[Zelandakh]

For occasions where you need a trump Q ask to decide between a grand or small the simplest solution is simply to use a bid of 5NT as the ask. Partner bids the lowest Q they do not hold and you bid the trump suit if it was not bypassed as a non-forcing ask. Obviously that's no good if you need to locate side-suit queens but it may well alleviate many of the problem hands.