Shoes

[Hanoi5]

[hv=pc=n&n=sak42ha6dakcat753&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=ppp2np3cp3sp4np5hp5np?]133|200[/hv]

 

Teams. You're playing 21-23 for the 2NT opening bid. 3♣ is normal stayman. 3♠ is 4 or 5 spades. 4NT is quantitative. Now comes the problem:

 

Your 5♥ shows 2 Aces. But you bid it because it shows 5KC without the queen (in spades); and you had a plan. Now your partner bids 5NT:

 

- 5♠ would have asked you to bid 5NT in order to pass. (You expected this and were gonna bid 6NT over 5♠)

- 5NT is used to ask for kings.

- You play specific kings in answer to this: if you have 2 kings you jump to 7.

- You don't want to assume that your partner made a mistake because that goes against the partnership.

 

Then:

 

- Even though you don't like it 'cause you would have bid differently (opening something else, responding 5♣ to show 4 aces or 6NT to end it all), what would you bid in this position?

- Have you reached (or seen people reach) a contract at the level of 7 after a quantitative 4NT bid? Is it normal?

- What do you think of making this kind of bids up at the table?

[helene_t]

Normally the replies to a quantitative 4NT are natural but I am aware that some show aces.

 

However, you shouldn't show keycards for spades. Now that you have shown spades and p hasn't supported them (hopefully he could have bid 4♥ as a slam try in spades), spades may be the least interesting suit.

 

Anyway, I bid 6♦ now to show ♦K.

[hrothgar]

I am hopelessly confused:

 

Partner asked me a specific question (Do I have a maximum or a minimum)

If I have a minimum, I am supposed to pass

If I have a maximum, I am supposed to show how many Aces I have

(All fine and dandy)

 

I decided to lie about the number of Aces I have and show 2 rather than 4 because I thought that I might be able to recover and bid 6N assuming that partner bids 5♠

 

NOW partner bids 5N (supposedly asking for Kings) with hand that can't hold any Aces and must know that the partnership is off two bullets.

 

I'm going to bid 6NT.

 

I can look at my hand and known that the wheels have come off.

(Whatever partner intended 5N to mean, it sure wasn't asking for Kings)

 

I am then looking forward to a discussion with the TD regarding my decision to psyche a 5♥ bid, more specifically whether this was actually a misbid, and how/when I discovered that my 5♥ bid was a mistake. I look forward to a much more unpleasant discussion with partner about my needing to learn how to bid...

[Phil]

Who let this problem into the A/E?

[gordontd]

Isn't it clear that, if your agreements really are as you say, partner has enough to know that you were showing five key-cards and not two. So, just answer the question.

[hrothgar]

Isn't it clear that, if your agreements really are as you say, partner has enough to know that you were showing five key-cards and not two. So, just answer the question.

 

It's weird enough to show Aces after a quantitative NT...

Keycard seems way out in left field

 

Don't get me wrong... It seems very plausible that someone thought that the actual agreement was that 4NT = "Keycard for Spades" and not "Quantitative NT (Please show your Aces if you have a max)".

 

However, 4NT = "Quantitative NT (Please show your Keycards if you have a max)" seems like an implausible agreement...

[jogs]

Partner has at most two kings and he's taken control of the auction. He's either totally out-to-lunch or 7NT is cold. Bid 7NT.

[jmcw]

I could have passed 4NT, now partner is inviting 7!

 

Did I lie to partner about Aces or did he read the 5♥ response as I had hoped. Assuming partner would not invite 7 missing an ace I feel compelled to respond as per our agreements.

 

So with 2 Kings I'm bidding 7 of something, probably ♣.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&n=sak42ha6dakcat753&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=ppp2np3cp3sp4np5hp5np?]133|200|

Hanoi5 wrote "Teams. You're playing 21-23 for the 2NT opening bid. 3♣ is normal stayman. 3♠ is 4 or 5 spades. 4NT is quantitative. Now comes the problem: Your 5♥ shows 2 Aces. But you bid it because it shows 5KC without the queen (in spades); and you had a plan. Now your partner bids 5NT: - 5♠ would have asked you to bid 5NT in order to pass. (You expected this and were gonna bid 6NT over 5♠) - 5NT is used to ask for kings.

- You play specific kings in answer to this: if you have 2 kings you jump to 7.

- You don't want to assume that your partner made a mistake because that goes against the partnership.

Then:

- Even though you don't like it 'cause you would have bid differently (opening something else, responding 5♣ to show 4 aces or 6NT to end it all), what would you bid in this position?

- Have you reached (or seen people reach) a contract at the level of 7 after a quantitative 4NT bid? Is it normal?

- What do you think of making this kind of bids up at the table?

 

IMO 7♣ = 10.

Partner is boss. You assume he has not made a mistake. So you're on systemic tram-lines :)

Opposite likely hands for partner, a grand (7♣, 7♠ or 7N) should have some play.

In answer to the follow-up questions: No, No, OK.[/hv]

[gordontd]

I could have passed 4NT, now partner is inviting 7!

 

Did I lie to partner about Aces or did he read the 5♥ response as I had hoped. Assuming partner would not invite 7 missing an ace I feel compelled to respond as per our agreements.

 

So with 2 Kings I'm bidding 7 of something, probably ♣.

Isn't one of your kings an "ace" you've already owned up to?

[jmcw]

Isn't one of your kings an "ace" you've already owned up to?

 

No. 2 additional Kings would give me at least 25 points, which I cannot have.

Presumably, partner wants me to sign off in 6NT without a King.

[Bbradley62]

Am I the only one who doesn't understand the title and subtitle of this thread?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

No. 2 additional Kings would give me at least 25 points, which I cannot have.

Presumably, partner wants me to sign off in 6NT without a King.

Agree that you can't have 2 outside K's .

So just "show" the King that you have with a 6D reply.

Partner will then "place" the contract.

 

If you didn't have an outside K, your bid would be 6S ( the "agreed" suit ).

It is left up to partner to pass or correct to 6NT.

[MrAce]

Normally the replies to a quantitative 4NT are natural but I am aware that some show aces.

 

However, you shouldn't show keycards for spades. Now that you have shown spades and p hasn't supported them (hopefully he could have bid 4♥ as a slam try in spades), spades may be the least interesting suit.

 

Anyway, I bid 6♦ now to show ♦K.

 

Helene for president ! U have my vote ;)

[jonottawa]

Who let this problem into the A/E?

 

I have another drink and spin the dial and bid whatever comes up like I did last round.

[diana_eva]

Am I the only one who doesn't understand the title and subtitle of this thread?

 

No.

 

And i was thoroughly disappointed :P

[Free]

I'm really confused. Partner bids quant and after he hears we're missing 2 Aces because we have a plan :blink: he wants to know about Kings for grand? :blink: The only way to figure out we were responding to RKC for ♠ is if he bid quant with 13HCP (you might have upgraded with 20HCP), which doesn't really belong in this section of the forums... <_<

[gwnn]

The title wants us to stand in opener's shoes. However, what to do when the shoes simply won't fit me ?

[DrMunk]

[hv=pc=n&n=sak42ha6dakcat753&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=ppp2np3cp3sp4np5hp5np?]133|200[/hv]

 

Teams. You're playing 21-23 for the 2NT opening bid. 3♣ is normal stayman. 3♠ is 4 or 5 spades. 4NT is quantitative. Now comes the problem:

 

Your 5♥ shows 2 Aces. But you bid it because it shows 5KC without the queen (in spades); and you had a plan. Now your partner bids 5NT:

 

- 5♠ would have asked you to bid 5NT in order to pass. (You expected this and were gonna bid 6NT over 5♠)

- 5NT is used to ask for kings.

- You play specific kings in answer to this: if you have 2 kings you jump to 7.

- You don't want to assume that your partner made a mistake because that goes against the partnership.

 

Then:

 

- Even though you don't like it 'cause you would have bid differently (opening something else, responding 5♣ to show 4 aces or 6NT to end it all), what would you bid in this position?

- Have you reached (or seen people reach) a contract at the level of 7 after a quantitative 4NT bid? Is it normal?

- What do you think of making this kind of bids up at the table?

 

 

1) Why did i not jump to 6 clubs over 4nt? This has to show this distribution, or it could possibly be a hand with 4-4 in the black suits with good black suits, and little soft values in the red suits.(AKQX;EX;EXX;KQJX)

 

2) Why is 5nt asking for kings when partner only invited slam? Would it not be more usefull to use it as pick a slam like bid, searching for a 4 card minor suit?

[ArtK78]

2) Why is 5nt asking for kings when partner only invited slam? Would it not be more usefull to use it as pick a slam like bid, searching for a 4 card minor suit?

 

I agree with this. Partner made a bid that could have been passed. Therefore, a grand slam is out of the question.

 

Of course, by the time the auction reached 5NT, it was clear that no one was thinking clearly. So ascribing some rational thought to the bid may be a bit much.

[the hog]

1) Why did i not jump to 6 clubs over 4nt? This has to show this distribution, or it could possibly be a hand with 4-4 in the black suits with good black suits, and little soft values in the red suits.(AKQX;EX;EXX;KQJX)

 

2) Why is 5nt asking for kings when partner only invited slam? Would it not be more usefull to use it as pick a slam like bid, searching for a 4 card minor suit?

 

I also agree with this. I bid 6C at this stage and discuss my "bidding" with partner afterwards.

[hrothgar]

I also agree with this. I bid 6C at this stage and discuss my "bidding" with partner afterwards.

 

I've seen a number of people advocate suggesting a club contract.

 

I'm not sure whether this makes sense in general.

I am especially leery about this suggestion given the specific auction to date.

 

If you are in a trump contract, you can't dodge club losers.

They are always going to come back to bite you.

 

If we had firm evidence that playing in clubs would give us an extrat trick via a ruff in the short hand this would be one thing.

Alternatively, if we thought that we needed to establish a long suit in partner's hand suggesting clubs would make sense.

But we don't...

 

Moreover, its unclear to me what kind of suit quality partner needs in order to sit for a club contract?

Is one honor? Does he need two? What about Kxxx? (I've seen people suggesting a grand in clubs)

 

Add in the fact that the auction to date is almost completely nonsensical and I think that these delicate club probes a recipe for disaster.

Unless you have a very well oiled partnership, a bid like this has a lot of ways to go wrong and not that many to succeed and the auction to date sure doesn't suggest a well oiled partnership...

[the hog]

I've seen a number of people advocate suggesting a club contract.

 

I'm not sure whether this makes sense in general.

I am especially leery about this suggestion given the specific auction to date.

 

If you are in a trump contract, you can't dodge club losers.

They are always going to come back to bite you.

 

If we had firm evidence that playing in clubs would give us an extrat trick via a ruff in the short hand this would be one thing.

Alternatively, if we thought that we needed to establish a long suit in partner's hand suggesting clubs would make sense.

But we don't...

 

Moreover, its unclear to me what kind of suit quality partner needs in order to sit for a club contract?

Is one honor? Does he need two? What about Kxxx? (I've seen people suggesting a grand in clubs)

 

Add in the fact that the auction to date is almost completely nonsensical and I think that these delicate club probes a recipe for disaster.

Unless you have a very well oiled partnership, a bid like this has a lot of ways to go wrong and not that many to succeed and the auction to date sure doesn't suggest a well oiled partnership...

 

Yes, perhaps you are right Richard. I must admit that i bid 6C because I have NO idea what partner wants and because my bidding to date was ridiculous. I offered 6C as a possible contract. I agree, though that the Cs should probably be better for the 6C bid to be a good bid.

[jdeegan]

:D Bid 6NT before something else bad happens.