Bid these hands

[dboxley]

[hv=pc=n&w=sat7h2dak7ckj9632&e=skj543hkqj4dq3ca7]266|100[/hv]

North deals. Please give your auction with comments. No opposition bidding. Ours started:

1♠

2♣ 2♥

2♠

 

Also please say if the 2♠ bid

1) promises 3+ spades

2) implies 3+ spades

3) neither.

[menggq]

2♠ promised S3+.

 

1S 2C

2H 2S

2N 3D

4C 4N

5H 5S ALL PASS

[han]

By implies, you perhaps meant suggests? If a bid implies 3 spades, it also promises 3 spades, but the promise is an inference rather than a direct consequence. For example, if you bid 3 suits naturally it implies shortness in the third.

 

My auction would be

 

1S - 2C

2H - 2S (promises 3+ spades)

2NT (bidding out shape) - 3D (bidding out shape, implies short hearts)

3S (denies a good hand for slam, the way I play it) - 4C

4H (ok, I don't have the heart ace but I feel like the hand is too good to bid 4S now) - now either 4S or 4NT and stop in 5S.

 

The only chance for stopping in 4S would be for responder to show heart shortness and for opener to reevaluate and show a minimum, in however way you have agreed to do that.

 

Still, I wouldn't be surprised to end in 5S on these hands.

[Free]

My auction would be

1♠ - 2♣ (5+♠ ; GF relay or INV with ♣)

2♥ - 3♠ (nat any strength ; GF good ♣ with 3+♠)

4♣ - 4♦ (cue with extras ; cue)

4NT* - 5♥ (RKC ; 2 without ♠Q)

5♠ - pass

 

*: opener may also bid 4♥ as last train, responder can then either signoff or RKC. Still, chance is huge we end up in 5♠, but we won't play 6♠.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

[hv=pc=n&w=sat7h2dak7ckj9632&e=skj543hkqj4dq3ca7]266|100[/hv]

North deals. Please give your auction with comments. No opposition bidding.

If you can show 4+ card raises with Bergen/Jac2NT( or a variation thereof ) / splinters, then

2S = 3 cards.

 

After a series of cue-bids Opener goes RKC since only he knows of no more than the 8 card fit.

Upon discovering a missing key card AND the trump Q, the slam odds are less than 50% ( ~ 34% at most ).

 

For example if trumps split 3-2 = 68%, you need to find the Q ... and you don't even know if partner has the 10 for an "either way" finesse.

 

Sign-off in 5S and hope you fulfill the contract.

[rhm]

[hv=pc=n&w=sat7h2dak7ckj9632&e=skj543hkqj4dq3ca7]266|100[/hv]

North deals. Please give your auction with comments. No opposition bidding. Ours started:

1♠

2♣ 2♥

2♠

 

Also please say if the 2♠ bid

1) promises 3+ spades

2) implies 3+ spades

3) neither.

 

The bidding starting with East

 

1NT--2♠ (transfer to ♣)

3♣---3♥ (singleton ♥)

3NT--5NT (pick a slam)

6NT

 

6NT is a good contract, 6♣ or 6♠ is not. 5NT is a close choice. West might also invite with 4NT, in which case this would be the final contract.

 

 

Rainer Herrmann

[dboxley]

By implies, you perhaps meant suggests? If a bid implies 3 spades, it also promises 3 spades, but the promise is an inference rather than a direct consequence. For example, if you bid 3 suits naturally it implies shortness in the third.

 

 

???????????????

By implies, I perhaps meant implies which is not in any way similar to promises, especially since the previous choice was promises.

[hatchett]

1♠ 2♣

2♥ 2♠

3♣ 3♦

3NT 4NT

6NT

 

 

2♠ guarantees 3 card support

Close between 3♣ and 2NT but like to show my feature in

partner's suit after he show 3 card support.

3NT suggestive

4NT natural invitational

[mike777]

1s=2c

2h=2s(slam try)

3c=3d

3h=4c

4nt=5h

5s

[han]

???????????????

By implies, I perhaps meant implies which is not in any way similar to promises, especially since the previous choice was promises.

 

Are you saying that if something is implied, you know for certain that it is true, while if something is promised, it depends entirely on the person making the promise? I am not sure whether to be offended by your comments, I am very trustworthy.

[han]

I realize that implies is in no way similar to promises. But if the person making the promise is trustworthy, then they are pretty much the same. Don't worry, I am not offended by your distinction.

[Vampyr]

Are you saying that if something is implied, you know for certain that it is true, while if something is promised, it depends entirely on the person making the promise?

 

"Promises" here would be systemic, not really relying on the trustworthiness of the partner. "Implies" indicates that most hands would have three spades because another bid was not chosen, but allows for the possibility that there are some hands without three spades for which no other bid was suitable.

[inquiry]

[hv=pc=n&w=skj543hkqj4dq3ca7&e=sat7h2dak7ckj9632]266|100[/hv]

 

I don't mind opening 1NT with 5422 hands like Rainer did in his auction, BUT, I don't open 1NT when both long suits are in the MAJORS, so no way I can duplicate his result.

 

So for me, the auction would be...

 

WEST   EAST

1♠ - see rule for not opening 1NT with 54 in majors

            2♣ - ok, GAME FORCING,

2♥ - natural, at least four card suit

            2♠ - 3 card spade support

2NT - shows 5-4-2-2 distribution AND at least some extra value (3♠ here would be 5-4-2-2 and no extras, 4♠ instead despirate weak

            3♣ - A jump to 4♣ would show all stregnth in black suits, so that is out

3♥ - shows good hearts, 3NT is still a possible contract despite the 2♠ raise

            3♠ - waiting, suggest strong slam interest

4♣ - cue-bid

            4♦ - cue-bid

4♠ - out of gas. Could bid 4♥ as last train.

            Pass ? ? ?

 

 

With ♣A, ♥A, ♠K and the either black queen surely would at least bid 4♥, remember he showed extra values with 2NT (as opposed to 3♠). Even ♥KQ, ♣A, ♠K and a fitting black queen. So I think it is possible to pass this out in 4♠. If East doesn't pass, he will use blackwood and end up in 5♠ like everyone else.

 

Note, change heart Q to x, West would have bid 3♠ instead of 2NT

change heart K to x, West would have bid 4♠ instead of 2NT (or 3♠) over 2♠)

 

[han]

Wowo stop. Indicates?

[kenrexford]

1♠-2♣(fit or real or both)

2♥-2♠(3+)

2NT(not two of the top three spades)-3♦(not two of the top three clubs, diamond control)

3♥(two of the top three hearts)-3NT(serious without two of the top three spades)

4♣(one of the top three clubs)-4♦(extra diamond control)

???

 

At this point, judgment kicks in. Might bid it and be happy or sad. Might miss it and be happy or sad. Might plug along and stop at the five-level and be happy or sad.

[rhm]

[hv=pc=n&w=skj543hkqj4dq3ca7&e=sat7h2dak7ckj9632]266|100[/hv]

 

I don't mind opening 1NT with 5422 hands like Rainer did in his auction, BUT, I don't open 1NT when both long suits are in the MAJORS, so no way I can duplicate his result.

I do not bend over backwards to open such distributions with 1NT.

But let me point out, almost anybody would open immediately 1NT with 4♠-4♥-2-3.

If you inspect the West hand (for some reason you seem to have exchanged East and West) you see

 

a) good doubletons

b) a preponderance of secondary honors and only one ace.

 

This is the type of hand which sometimes is worth more in notrump than in a suit contract.

If you give partner no 4 card major, notrump will sometimes play better than ♠, in particular single dummy after an uninformative sequence like 1NT-3NT.

Giving partner exact information about your strength immediately (like in this case) has benefits too. If you open 1♠ it is often hard in 2/1 sequences to relay to partner that you have a little bit (but not that much) more than a minimum opening bid. The same holds true if partner responds 1NT to 1♠, which also may wrong-side notrump.

You will probably bid 2♥ and claim there is no rebid problem. But do you have 11 HCP or like here 16 HCP suitable for a notrump game?

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Free]

The bidding starting with East

 

1NT--2♠ (transfer to ♣)

3♣---3♥ (singleton ♥)

3NT--5NT (pick a slam)

6NT

 

6NT is a good contract, 6♣ or 6♠ is not. 5NT is a close choice. West might also invite with 4NT, in which case this would be the final contract.

 

 

Rainer Herrmann

I haven't calculated in depth, but is 6NT really that much better? Seems to me that 6♣ needs the ♣ finesse and most of the time a 3-2 split, in 6♠ you need to find the ♠Q. In 6NT I guess you'll try to drop the ♣Q and if that fails you'll fall back on the ♠ finesse (and decide which side to take it). If 6♣ or 6♠ fails it will usually be -1, if 6NT fails it will be -2.

 

I also find it remarkable to open this hand 1NT. There are some valid arguments obviously, but without a rebid problem I don't feel the need to open 1NT. It might be more acceptable with the Majors reversed. :)

[whereagles]

My auction, but I should note this is bid assuming my pet system:

 

1♠ 2♣

2♥ 2♠

3♣ 4NT

5♠ pass

 

2♠: slammish, honest 3 cards raise (3♠ would be an honest raise as well, but without slam overtones and 4♠ a picture bid)

3♣: values

4NT: I know all I need to know

pass to 5♠: 1 key and queen out make it depend on too much. Would bid 6 if I needed a swing

[dboxley]

"Promises" here would be systemic, not really relying on the trustworthiness of the partner. "Implies" indicates that most hands would have three spades because another bid was not chosen, but allows for the possibility that there are some hands without three spades for which no other bid was suitable.

 

That is EXACTLY what I meant, thank you Vampyr.

[Phil]

Promises? Implies?

 

Implies is stronger than "alludes to", "infers", much less "hints at" I think, so this seems like an argument about semantics rather than bidding. I think I would end up in 5♠.

 

1♠ - 2♣

2♥ - 2♠

2N - 3♦

 

 

2♠ doesn't guarantee 3, but once responder bids 3♦ over 2N, 3 card support is assured. I would end up in 5♠ I'm pretty sure. Kudos to those that play any number of NT.

 

By the way, I prefer a style where 2♠ shows 3, and 3♠ shows four card support. What are the others playing 3♠ as?

[gnasher]

Implies is stronger than "alludes to", "infers", much less "hints at" I think, so this seems like an argument about semantics rather than bidding.

 

The difference between "implies", "alludes to" and "infers" isn't one of strength: the three words have different meanings. In this sequence, responder implies three spades, opener infers that responder has three spades, and either player may allude to this in the postmortem.

[xxhong]

1S 2C

2H 2S

4C(cue bid, showing extra, 15+HCP, 5-4-2-2 shape, 2 or 4 KC)4D(cue)

4H(cue) 5C(cue, slam zone, denies SQ)

5N(choice of slams, we have no cuebids available, we may miss one KC and SQ, but DQ, SJ and HQJ should justifies this bid, if partner thinks that we are in the slam zone) 6N

 

This hand is no easy.

 

[hv=pc=n&w=sat7h2dak7ckj9632&e=skj543hkqj4dq3ca7]266|100[/hv]

North deals. Please give your auction with comments. No opposition bidding. Ours started:

1♠

2♣ 2♥

2♠

 

Also please say if the 2♠ bid

1) promises 3+ spades

2) implies 3+ spades

3) neither.

[MrAce]

 

By the way, I prefer a style where 2♠ shows 3, and 3♠ shows four card support. What are the others playing 3♠ as?

 

I play like this too Phil, but now that i see u do too, it must be wrong and i will change it asap :P

 

I haven't calculated in depth, but is 6NT really that much better?

 

Yes, 6 NT is better. Basically in 6 ♣ or ♠, your chances are reduced to scoring all your trumps after♥A is cashed. However in 6NT u have the same chances + cashing AK in other suit first.

 

I wonder though, which line would be the best in 6 NT ? Which AK to cash first ? I would think to cash AK ♠ and if not drops go for ♣ finesse which has 1 way to play it and u dont torture yourself for misguessing ♠ :P However i am sure we will be tortured in ♣ suit as well when/if RHO drops Q or T in first round :) (Q from QT, or T from Tx)

[gnasher]

I wonder though, which line would be the best in 6 NT ? Which AK to cash first ? I would think to cash AK ♠ and if not drops go for ♣ finesse which has 1 way to play it and u dont torture yourself for misguessing ♠ :P However i am sure we will be tortured in ♣ suit as well when/if RHO drops Q or T in first round :) (Q from QT, or T from Tx)

 

In 6NT, it looks right to cash the top diamonds, top clubs, and top hearts, then guess the spades using whatever information we have gleaned. However, we may not get the chance to do that.

 

Suppose that we get a diamond lead. One of our routes to twelve tricks is 5 spades + 3 diamonds + 2 clubs + 2 hearts. When we knock out ♥A, we don't want them to have a black-suit winner, so we should play a heart first. That will probably hold, so we'll play another one, throwing a club. Now they could play a third heart, forcing us to pitch a spade (we can't afford another club).

 

That would make it impossible to play South for ♠Q after cashing the top clubs, so we'd be back to a guess as to which black suit to cash the top cards in.

 

There's some scope for mind-games here, but not many defenders would see deeply enough for that.

Edited May 27, 2011 by gnasher

[han]

The difference between "implies", "alludes to" and "infers" isn't one of strength: the three words have different meanings. In this sequence, responder implies three spades, opener infers that responder has three spades, and either player may allude to this in the postmortem.

 

Yay!