Namyats continuations

[straube]

I've seen several schemes after (for example) 4C showing a good preempt in hearts

 

4D-all-purpose slam try

 

4D-asks which suit partner has 2 or more losers in (not protected by an Ace or King)

 

4D-denies a tenace, wants opener to play the hand

 

I'm thinking that a tenace in responder's hand is not always present or valuable, but hiding opener's shape might be.

 

How about

 

4D-transfer

4H-slam try

4S-RKC

 

Thoughts?

[Zelandakh]

Alot depends on the definition of your Namyats opening. The first definition I learnt was either a solid suit without an outside ace/void, or a 1 loser suit with an outside ace/void. Typical responses to a 4C opening for that are

 

4D asks

...4H shows 1 loser suit with outside void

......4S asks for the void

...4S/5m = that ace

...4N = solid suit

and similarly for 4D. When your Namyats opening is well defined like this it does not really make much sense to use 4H as a slam try.

 

As you suggest many others are less well defined in their Namyats opening and then using 4D as a general slam try is reasonable. Very commonly this is used to ask for the number of winners (7 versus 8 perhaps) or the number of losers (using LTC) for those that define their Namyats openings in this way.

 

The method you suggest of using a transfer with either a sign-off or a strong hand while bidding the suit for invites is how I usually play these situations and no doubt will work here too. But I would suggest to you that you can use 4C - 4D - 4H - 4S as RKCB so the immediate bid of 4S is available here for something else, perhaps a natural slam try, perhaps as an asking bid, perhaps as a splinter - whatever you fancy really depending on what your Namyats opening is allowed to contain.

[Free]

Alot depends on the definition of your Namyats opening.

This sums it up very nicely... :)

[straube]

I want to play them undisciplined. No promise of the K of trump, no promise of 2 fast losers in no more than 1 side suit. We need these bids to handle the freak hands with 8+ trump because we relay our opening 1M hands and have no provision to find out that partner is 8-3-1-1 or whatever. I think 4m should promise 8 1/2 tricks and 4M should promise something less than that.

 

In general, when one opens an 8-cd suit, is it better for that hand to declare or partner? I would think the preempt hand should declare so that opponents won't know which aces and kings are cashing.

 

Looking for more suggestions for continuations for 4C showing hearts.

[dake50]

Taking space leaves little room for multi-exploring.

I like 4D (the intervening bid) to transfer to opener.

Choose 4H with tenaces/surprise shape.

 

What slam tries?

Western Q? 4S,5C,5D alerts this control needed. (straight-up or Zia-type)

Modified Key-ask? Won't have HAK+A, but may need a top heart?

5NT Grand ask?

[Gerben42]

Certainly I wouldn't play 4♣ - 4♦ as transfer, rather it should be asking for something. I play it as asking for 1st round controls.

 

4♣ - 4♠: Asking for Keycards

4♣ - 4NT / 5m: Control asking bids

[straube]

I'm thinking after 4C that either 4D or 4H should be a slam try. Obviously 4D is the standout candidate because responder may bid again, but lead considerations may be important. If opener should usually play the hand, then 4H as a slam try is workable. So asking again, who should usually declare the hand?

[mtvesuvius]

So asking again, who should usually declare the hand?

 

In general you want the Namyats bidder to declare. Since that hand rates to be more distributional, you want it hidden, this way the opponents won't know clearly which aces/kings to cash. IMO, this is MUCH more valuable than any type of a slam try.

 

I usually play something like:

4D -> 4H to sign off (or ask for specific controls/aces -- 4S)

4H - General Purpose Slam Try

4S - RKC

4N - Spade Cuebid

5C+ - Cuebids

[glen]

In general you want the Namyats bidder to declare. Since that hand rates to be more distributional, you want it hidden, this way the opponents won't know clearly which aces/kings to cash. IMO, this is MUCH more valuable than any type of a slam try.

 

I usually play something like:

4D -> 4H to sign off (or ask for specific controls/aces -- 4S)

4H - General Purpose Slam Try

4S - RKC

4N - Spade Cuebid

5C+ - Cuebids

 

This seems right, though would change:

4♥: Mild slam try

4♦->4♥->4♠ Serious slam try (now 4NT is RKC)

4♦->4♥->4NT+ Specific asks

 

Btw Adam's The Best System series is a must read: http://precisionpass.blogspot.com/

[straube]

In general you want the Namyats bidder to declare. Since that hand rates to be more distributional, you want it hidden, this way the opponents won't know clearly which aces/kings to cash. IMO, this is MUCH more valuable than any type of a slam try.

 

I usually play something like:

4D -> 4H to sign off (or ask for specific controls/aces -- 4S)

4H - General Purpose Slam Try

4S - RKC

4N - Spade Cuebid

5C+ - Cuebids

 

Thanks. I was thinking the preemptor needed to declare but I wanted to hear someone else say so. 4C-4H as a general slam try makes sense. I'm wondering when I would want to cue bid as opposed to RKC or bidding the general slam try.

[mtvesuvius]

Btw Adam's The Best System series is a must read: http://precisionpass.blogspot.com/

 

Thanks Glen, glad you liked it :)

[mgoetze]

Btw Adam's The Best System series is a must read: http://precisionpass.blogspot.com/

 

I'm not so sure that Jassem's book on Polish Club is so recommendable. Apparently it is not really the way Polish Club is commonly played, and it certainly doesn't match my preferences.

[mtvesuvius]

I'm not so sure that Jassem's book on Polish Club is so recommendable. Apparently it is not really the way Polish Club is commonly played, and it certainly doesn't match my preferences.

It seemed fairly logical to me, perhaps I was too tired when I read it though: 13 hour journey back from the Reno NABC after not having any sleep the night before...

 

Sorry for the mild thread-jacking... I guess I'll go write something about Namyats then ;)

[mtvesuvius]

One more thought on Namyats... Perhaps if you are doing it with many 8 card suits, you may want to have a trump quality ask.

 

Instead of using 4 of opener's suit as a "General Purpose Slam Try", it would probably be better used as a Trump Quality ask... you could work out a set of responses to that to show different suit strengths. This way you don't have a problem like this with a void.

[Cascade]

We play first step asked for solid trumps.

 

However I think it might be better to just ask range unless the range is already tight.