jumping to 4M after a limited opening with a good hand

[Fluffy]

what are your thoughts about raising to 4M after partner opens 1M limited and you have a strong balanced hand that might make slam opposite the right hand, is it worth it?, how unlikelly does slam need to be for it to be profitable in case you catch opponents slipping into the auction too high?

 

Almost all hands worth a GF can make slam opposite the right void and values, some stronger will make it opposite a good maximum with the right singleton. But is it worth investigating?

[awm]

In general I'm not that fond of this strategy; I've found that it's pretty unusual for opponents to bid over a 2NT forcing raise or a 2/1 sequence anyway, so I don't gain all that much. If partner needs a real freak to make slam you're usually okay just bidding game though. It will rarely cost and sometimes partner bids on with a real freak anyway (i.e. might make slam opposite a decent preemptive raise too)... plus these freak hands often have a lot of total tricks and you may do better playing 4♠ making six than defending a doubled seven-level sacrifice down a couple! If a 5431 opener with the right singleton and near the top of the range would make slam, I'd go slow.

[PrecisionL]

I play this style (raising to game as pre-emptive or expect to make game) with several partners especially playing match point pairs. However, in IMP competition I revert to Hardy Raises with possible slam invitational hands.

 

However, playing canape we use 2♣ as an Artificial and Game Forcing relay with 3-card or less support while still using 2NT as 4-card invitational or better support.

[nigel_k]

I've found that it's pretty unusual for opponents to bid over a 2NT forcing raise or a 2/1 sequence anyway, so I don't gain all that much.

I think the idea is that the fourth hand might come in when he shouldn't if you bid 1♥-4♥. The tactic is ok as long at it's a minimum raise to game and you can vary it according to the tendencies of the opponents or what you did against them last time.

[shevek]

There is another danger in bidding 1♥ - 4♥ with a wide variety.

 

Say the next hand bids 4♠.

A shapely opener may want to bid 5♥ as an each way bet over this but feel constrained by your possible balanced 14-count. Opener has

 

♠6 ♥AKJ532 ♦KQT7 ♣74

 

5♥ looks right opposite a shapely raise but you would want to defend opposite

 

♠KQ5 ♥Q764 ♦A6 ♣QJ95

 

A neat solution is for opener to double here to show this - a hand that wants to be at the 5-level opposite a shapely raise.

[rbforster]

I think this idea made more sense in the old style of precision where your 1M opener showed 12-15, not in many of the more aggressive model styles where the strong club is used to accommodate lighter openings like 10-15. I play the lighter opening style and it gets very hard to judge when to give up on slam since partner could have a prime 15 or a crap 10 count. I guess I don't play enough to have a real feeling for how often my opponents would go wrong with a marginal hand over 1M-(P)-4M-?

[olien]

My partner and I have put limitations on responder jumping to 4M with an opening hand in a precision context. These have made things much easier for us in judging later on. These are our guidlines:

 

1) <5 control points

 

2) If full opening bid, then not 4-card support with a "bluhmer" (e.g. side xxx or xxxx that would make slam look good opposite shortness). This does not apply if we have only 3-card support as the shorter fit makes a light slam in the major significantly less likely.

 

3) The fact that we play 1M-3NT as 3M-433 and minimum GF values lets us infer that partner is not 4333 with 3-card support if he jumps to 4M.

 

Also, when I hold a good hand and my partner jumps to 4M, I get an idea of how good partner's hand is by the tempo of the opponents (especially RHO over 4M). Not always accurate, but if there's no hitch by either opponent, then there's a much better chance of partner having a good hand. (atleast this works better around here as people tend not to wait 10 seconds over a skip bid)

[mycroft]

Another benefit to this besides what's been explained here (and yes, the downsides are there as well), is that your "big raise" is now not *just* game-forcing; it's slam-going. You're looking at finding out whether you shouldn't be in slam, rather than whether you should be. And that knowledge will encourage some minimums that would need to put on the brakes if partner could be just 13.

 

I find that we almost always have 3-card support for the strong version this bid, by the way; and frequently a wishy-washy 3442 or 3433.

[han]

Ever since my partner used the term "slam-going" as "I'm going to slam, maybe we have a grand slam", I try to avoid this word.

[JLOGIC]

I do it a lot. It is just a massive advantage for partner to be declaring with the opps knowing nothing about his hand, and leading knowing nothing about either hand. It also catches 4th seat with a tough problem sometimes.

[dake50]

"Almost all hands worth a GF can make slam opposite the right void and values, some stronger will make it opposite a good maximum with the right singleton. But is it worth investigating?" -- Fluffy

 

*** Doesn't that answer your question?

*** If the right void is possible, look for that void.

[benlessard]

IMO its mostly depend on if partner open in 1st or 2nd seat and at imps or MP. With modern style preempting

 

(P)--1H---(P)---4H is going to buy the auction more than 99% of the times so going fast make no sense at IMPs but may make some sense at MP (willing to miss some good slam but winning back some MP because of bad leads & tougher defenses).

 

1H--(P)--4H here its a different story since you want to weight the drawback of missing some good slams VS the good overcalls and wrong guess that 4th seat is going to make.

 

I believe that the average expert is slightly too optimistic in their slam bidding and are in general going too slow at the cost of giving away too much information and allowing opps to overcall too easily.

[JLOGIC]

IMO its mostly depend on if partner open in 1st or 2nd seat and at imps or MP. With modern style preempting

 

(P)--1H---(P)---4H is going to buy the auction more than 99% of the times so going fast make no sense at IMPs but may make some sense at MP (willing to miss some good slam but winning back some MP because of bad leads & tougher defenses).

 

 

Why does it make "no sense at imps." The opponents will have a much harder time leading and defending when they know almost nothing about declarers hand type. Compared to even: 1H 2C 2D 4H or something, or 1H 2C 2N 4H they know a lot more about the hand when they're defending and leading. Think how different it is defending when you know opener is 5(332) rather than just any 1H opener. Think about how much easier leading is when you know the nature of dummy. All of this will lead you to make more thin games when you bid 1H p 4H. Yes, it is even more advantageous in MP because you gain when they let you make an overtrick also, but that doesn't mean it makes no sense at imps.

[benlessard]

Why does it make "no sense at imps." The opponents will have a much harder time leading and defending when they know almost nothing about declarers hand type. Compared to even: 1H 2C 2D 4H or something, or 1H 2C 2N 4H they know a lot more about the hand when they're defending and leading. Think how different it is defending when you know opener is 5(332) rather than just any 1H opener. Think about how much easier leading is when you know the nature of dummy. All of this will lead you to make more thin games when you bid 1H p 4H. Yes, it is even more advantageous in MP because you gain when they let you make an overtrick also, but that doesn't mean it makes no sense at imps.

I was talking about hands with some slam potential. These hands are just unlikely to go down while going fast could bury a good slam. As a I understand it nobody here is suggesting going slow on hands with almost no slam potential.

EX

Axxx

xx

AQxxxx

x

 

(P)--1S--(P)--???

 

At MP i bid a auto 4S

At Imps I believe 4S is slightly lazy. Slam is not likely at all but its clearly possible. While the odds that bidding 2D vs a direct 4S will cost us our game seems remote.

Put partner in 1st seat and switch H/S and its a different story. Burying 4th seat is just so profitable.

 

The story is the same for strong balanced hand.