ATB Missed 6D

[MrAce]

 

But if South's auction shows his hand, different story, and impressively precise bidding system.

 

 

 

Yep, in forums it works this way, we assume pd has stiff ♥ to start with, and then we assume he has at most 4 loser hand, not enough then we assume he has enough keycards and then argue that North should bid the slam....This doesnt happen in real life, even top experts dont discuss like " lets express 3 loser 7-4 hand this way, and 4 loser hand that way and 5 loser hand another way..."

 

 

 

 

4N minors is the routine expert use for the bid. What suit is agreed for ace asking ? It comes up a lot more often than hands you want to ask aces on.

 

Where do you want to play opposite a 4315 ?

 

I dunno which experts u are talking about

 

It is not even remotely routine expert use for the ones that i asked. Not 1 single among top USA players thought it was when i asked in BBO, including the ones who frequently writes in these forums. It being routine use and being the correct way are totally different things thats what u are confusing imo. Big majority said it was RKCB in ♠ and the rest said "god knows what it is for pd , i would never bid it"

[bluecalm]

Imo all blame goes to North. It wasn't big mistake though imo.

[campboy]

Sitting North, I don't picture South with a hand that makes twelve tricks if I am holding xxxx, xxx, Qxx, KQx - or less.

 

But that is South's hand, so I don't understand the level of responsibility assigned to North rather than South by some.

It might not be odds-on for South to have a hand that can produce slam opposite that, but it's surely not unlikely. That hand is obviously going to fit well with a distributional minor 2-suiter. North might as easily have KQxx, xxx, Qxx, xxx, which rates to be one or two tricks worse.

 

I don't think North bears much blame, but his decision between 5♦ and 6♦ is the only close one IMO.

[barryallen]

I think north did not appreciate what a great hand he had for this auction, south forced to the 5 level in an auction where the meaning of 4H is ambiguous (many would think it agrees spades), he has working spade cards (if this is just on a hook through the 1H overcaller that's fine) and huge diamond support.

 

That's true to a degree, but how is North meant to know that by only having 2 clubs was key to bring home the slam? Inform South that North had 3-4 diamonds and the ♠A and slam looks very likely after that bidding. When South bids 4NT he denies himself that information and commits the side to 5 of a minor.

 

When you only need partner to have ♠A, 4 small ♦ and only 2♣, how can you expect partner to raise to the 6 level? South knows and gave himself no chance of a clue of finding Norths holding.

[bluecalm]

only having 2 clubs was key to bring home the slam?

 

Well, 4NT is 6-4 or 7-4 so having 2 clubs with 4 diamonds is great asset opposite those hands, much better than 3 or 4.

[jdeegan]

4N minors is the routine expert use for the bid. What suit is agreed for ace asking ? It comes up a lot more often than hands you want to ask aces on.

 

Where do you want to play opposite a 4315 ?

:P (1) Your assertion about frequency of occurrence is pure B.S., and you know it.

(2) With no suit agreed, control asking reverts to regular blackwood

(3) I want to play in my 7 bagger, almost always, so I can take the taps. The 7-1 ♦ fit should be as good as the rare and obscure 5-4 ♣ fit.

[Cyberyeti]

:P (1) Your assertion about frequency of occurrence is pure B.S., and you know it.

(2) With no suit agreed, control asking reverts to regular blackwood

(3) I want to play in my 7 bagger, almost always, so I can take the taps. The 7-1 ♦ fit should be as good as the rare and obscure 5-4 ♣ fit.

I come from a world where the initial negative double strongly implies both blacks not just spades, hence 4N minors is completely routine. I don't believe most of the people I know would find the initial double. Some would bid 1♠ showing 4, others would raise diamonds.

 

I believe a number of UK players will think the same way. I have polled a few people but none have replied yet.

 

Where do you want to be opposite Axxx, xxx, x, KQxxx, I want to be in clubs you clearly want to be in diamonds, GL when somebody has a small singleton diamond.

 

I can't remember the last time I used straight 4 ace Blackwood, it must be at least 10 years.

[MrAce]

I come from a world where the initial negative double strongly implies both blacks not just spades, hence 4N minors is completely routine. I don't believe most of the people I know would find the initial double. Some would bid 1♠ showing 4, others would raise diamonds.

 

I believe a number of UK players will think the same way. I have polled a few people but none have replied yet.

 

Where do you want to be opposite Axxx, xxx, x, KQxxx, I want to be in clubs you clearly want to be in diamonds, GL when somebody has a small singleton diamond.

 

I can't remember the last time I used straight 4 ace Blackwood, it must be at least 10 years.

 

 

You said "It is routine expert use" which turned out to be not even remotely related to reality. So what you claimed was way off.

 

If you however, want to debate which one is the better use for 4NT it is another story. Here is what i think;

 

-Yes 4NT asking RKCB is not frequent. But is frequency always the priority ? After all when you occupy this 4NT with something else, you just disable your side from asking RKCB each time they bid and preempt at 3 level.

 

-Second, is what you suggesting more frequent ? I dont think the frequency of me having 7-4 7-5 minors when combined with pd holding exactly stiff or void in my first suit and 4+ in my 2nd suit is much higher than RKCB hands. Thats the only time it has some merits to it. It has to be way much higher in order for decent players to consider it because after all you can still bid your 2 suits naturally (not as effective as 4NT) but you can not learn keycards at all if it is spared for another bid.

 

But overall if my pd insisted on playing it i wouldnt mind, as long as we have an agreement.

 

 

I come from a world where the initial negative double strongly implies both blacks not just spades, hence 4N minors is completely routine. I don't believe most of the people I know would find the initial double. Some would bid 1♠ showing 4, others would raise diamonds.

 

Now this is where it gets funny imo. Playing 4NT as minors make much more sense if you play DBL promissing ONLY spade suit. Not the way you suggest to play initial DBL.

 

Here is why.

 

-When your pd DBLES in the way you suggest and promise both black suits, why in hell would you want to play 4NT as minors ? LOL You already know u have at least 4-4 fit !!!

-And when your pd bids 1♠ instead, you will never know how many ♠ he has, in the DBL showing ONLY 4♠ method, South now knows his pd has EXACTLY 4♠ and AT MOST 3♥ which leaves his pd 6+ minor cards, thus playing 4NT as minors would make more sense than the other one. After all South would not be sure how many ♣ his pd have (double didnt promise 4+ ♣ ) and he would not be worried that pd may have 6+♠ suit.

 

So you are saying things that doesn't add up with each other imo.

[Cyberyeti]

You said "It is routine expert use" which turned out to be not even remotely related to reality. So what you claimed was way off.

 

If you however, want to debate which one is the better use for 4NT it is another story. Here is what i think;

 

-Yes 4NT asking RKCB is not frequent. But is frequency always the priority ? After all when you occupy this 4NT with something else, you just disable your side from asking RKCB each time they bid and preempt at 3 level.

 

-Second, is what you suggesting more frequent ? I dont think the frequency of me having 7-4 7-5 minors when combined with pd holding exactly stiff or void in my first suit and 4+ in my 2nd suit is much higher than RKCB hands. Thats the only time it has some merits to it. It has to be way much higher in order for decent players to consider it because after all you can still bid your 2 suits naturally (not as effective as 4NT) but you can not learn keycards at all if it is spared for another bid.

 

But overall if my pd insisted on playing it i wouldnt mind, as long as we have an agreement.

 

 

 

 

Now this is where it gets funny imo. Playing 4NT as minors make much more sense if you play DBL promissing ONLY spade suit. Not the way you suggest to play initial DBL.

 

Here is why.

 

-When your pd DBLES in the way you suggest and promise both black suits, why in hell would you want to play 4NT as minors ? LOL You already know u have at least 4-4 fit !!!

-And when your pd bids 1♠ instead, you will never know how many ♠ he has, in the DBL showing ONLY 4♠ method, South now knows his pd has EXACTLY 4♠ and AT MOST 3♥ which leaves his pd 6+ minor cards, thus playing 4NT as minors would make more sense than the other one. After all South would not be sure how many ♣ his pd have (double didnt promise 4+ ♣ ) and he would not be worried that pd may have 6+♠ suit.

 

So you are saying things that doesn't add up with each other imo.

Not at all.

 

A. I would also bid this way with some 6-4s, so it is way more frequent than the hand I don't think exists I want to ask for aces.

B. On this hand I really only want to play in clubs opposite 5 unless partner's void in diamonds, it's less clear opposite 4, 4N is thus better than just bidding clubs.

C. I don't actually play the 1♠ on 4, so I'm not sure how you deal with it, but I believe the philosophy is to bid what you'd bid without the overcall, and use X for the hands where you'd bid 1N without the overcall but can't now, ie with clubs, not spades and no stop that are too good to pass.

D. Most people I know would never ever make a take out double with 4 card support for partner's bid suit (which in Acolville is a 4+ card suit regardless of which minor).

[r_prah]

I agree with the arguments made by Roger and Ben Lessard - North has a great hand in context of the auction - the ♠A, good four card diamond support and a doubleton club. I would bid 6♦ with the North hand. I also like the 4NT call by South btw.

[MrAce]

Not at all.

 

A. I would also bid this way with some 6-4s, so it is way more frequent than the hand I don't think exists I want to ask for aces.

B. On this hand I really only want to play in clubs opposite 5 unless partner's void in diamonds, it's less clear opposite 4, 4N is thus better than just bidding clubs.

C. I don't actually play the 1♠ on 4, so I'm not sure how you deal with it, but I believe the philosophy is to bid what you'd bid without the overcall, and use X for the hands where you'd bid 1N without the overcall but can't now, ie with clubs, not spades and no stop that are too good to pass.

D. Most people I know would never ever make a take out double with 4 card support for partner's bid suit (which in Acolville is a 4+ card suit regardless of which minor).

 

 

Oh my, this is getting more interesting each time you reply...

 

A-B- you make this with also 6-4 hands ok. And u say you want to play in clubs IF PD HAS 5 of them. So you are basically telling your pd to bid clubs when he has 5 and if he has 4 you are telling him to bid ♦ unless he is void, which makes you play 6-2 or 6-1 fit instead of 4-4 fit. This doesnt make sense because you and Cascade also saying that this shd be a 4 loser hand, NOT a SACRIFICE hand !! Why would someone fear from a 4-4 fit when the hand is strong enough to make 5 minor and/or offer slam ? It is easier to construct 4 loser hands with 7-4, it needs a really strong hand to construct 4 loser hand with 6-4.

 

C- You are not playing 1♠ on 4 cards, you also dont DBL with 4♠ unless you have side club suit. Then what do you do with 4 card ♠ 7+ hcp ? Because since you mentioned about the frequency, this is the hand type which will come the most frequent!

 

EDIT: Your first claim "This is a routine expert use" dropped to "Routine expert use in Acolville" now ?

[jdeegan]

I come from a world where the initial negative double strongly implies both blacks not just spades, hence 4N minors is completely routine. I don't believe most of the people I know would find the initial double. Some would bid 1♠ showing 4, others would raise diamonds.

 

I believe a number of UK players will think the same way. I have polled a few people but none have replied yet.

 

Where do you want to be opposite Axxx, xxx, x, KQxxx, I want to be in clubs you clearly want to be in diamonds, GL when somebody has a small singleton diamond.

 

I can't remember the last time I used straight 4 ace Blackwood, it must be at least 10 years.

:P My bidding style is SO reactionary that imho 1♠ is the best call with the north hand. Imho it should show a 'biddable' 4-bagger or a longer ♠ suit. Unhappily, here in the colonies during my 20 year hiatus from bridge, someone convinced most of the duplicate players to double with ANY four card ♠ suit and to forget about their club holding (you see an example of this with this very hand). It is a terrible idea, but these wussies are afraid to play a 4-3 spade fit at the 2 level even with a decent spade suit.

 

I do retain a stubborn insistence not to give up my ace asking bids. When you need them, lots of points are at stake. There are so many different ways it can come up.

 

Finally, I'm not contending that the 7-1 fit is better than the 4-5 fit, just that to try to find it, you give up too much. Indeed, what will pard do with AQxx, xxx, xx, Qxxx? As far as you know, you will end up in a 4-4 fit with (given the bidding) about a 50-50 chance of a 4-1 or 5-0 rail and no way for you ever to tell if your club fit is 4-4 or 4-5 until the dummy comes down. The 7-1 fit is far from perfect, but these kind of 7-4 and 7-5 hands are a special breed because of the taps.

[billw55]

You missed a 24 point slam in an auction where the opponents preempted to 3H. Not much blame to go around imo.

 

North could easily have another spade instead of 7th diamond, or a 6-5 with KJxxx of clubs - or even QJxxx - or whatever and bid the same.

Agree. This only makes because north has a doubleton club. Good luck figuring that out.

[benlessard]

You missed a 24 point slam in an auction where the opponents preempted to 3H. Not much blame to go around imo.

 

North could easily have another spade instead of 7th diamond, or a 6-5 with KJxxx of clubs - or even QJxxx - or whatever and bid the same.

Agree. This only makes because north has a doubleton club. Good luck figuring that out.

 

With those hands he would just bid 5C not 4NT. Anyway this hand seems tough but it shouldnt be its a failure not to reach slam here. South can bid 4H to suggest slam in any suit (think about it it make no sense to keep 4H as always showing spades and its pointless to have a ace asking bid here on a 4-4 fit) and failed to make the bid. North has extras, no wasted values + extra trumps and made the same bid that he would have done if he had crap. (KQxx,Qxx,xxx,xxx)

[ahydra]

I like 4H - for me it would show a strong hand with a heart shortage. North shouldn't give up on slam now that partner has shown a <=5 loser hand and he has 8 with no heart wastage, great trumps and ruffing values, but what can he bid... 4S control showing I guess, but South might pass if he had spades. Works here though, since then it goes 5C by South and 6D by North?

 

One other thing I considered was an X of 3H by South to start with. When he follows this up with some number of diamonds North knows South has a huge hand, and bids 6D. But that's when West sticks in a 4H bid just to be an arse... :)

 

ahydra