Phil Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 R/R IMPs 98 AJx AJxxx Q9x. You open 1♦, pass on your left, 1♠ by pard. RHO preempts 3♥ which you pass, pass by LHO. Partner bids 4♥. You bid 4♠ and he bids 5♦. (Sorry I realize hands like this are better for the handviewer which now displays on my crackberry, although I still can't input). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 I bid 4♠? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Sorry, maybe 4♠ is normal. I'm used to playing strong jump shifts so I don't have any experience with this kind of auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Partner doesn't have to have a strong jump shift. All he needs is a game forcing hand with no clear direction and shortness in hearts. 4♠ is certainly not a wonderful call, but what is the alternative? 5♦? 4NT to play? I am assuming that by "strong jump shift" you mean the traditional powerhouse nearly-slam-forcing type of strong jump shift, rather than a hand that his game forcing with a strong suit. If that is the case, then 4♠ has even less appeal than it would otherwise have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Sure, the alternative is 4NT. We have a balanced minimum with AJx of hearts and two small spades.Did we bid 4♠ to allow partner room to keycard? If he had bid 4NT immediately over 3♥, what would that have been? Anyway, in the original auction he could have bid 5♣ (or 5♠?) to ask for a heart control and he could have bid 5♥ to ask for a club control so I'm inclined to think that 5♦ is natural. He has a slam invite with spades and diamonds. We still have a balanced min and the ♥A might be duplicated. I think I would pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Yes but there much doubt about strain when partner bids 5♦? If he was interested in the black suits he could have bid 4♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rduran1216 Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Partner should take control with a hand that is a lock for slam, we have 7 working HCP, I'm passing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Partner's bid seems to be looking for a ♣ control, and we don't have one. Partner didn't use 4NT, so is probably void in ♥ and if not must be missing both top ♣. In either case they don't have ♣A. At least one of ♠, ♦ or ♣ is likely to be breaking badly. All in all, this makes slam unlikely. Partner is probably 5035, 6034 or 5044. It's probably quite close which of 5♠ or 5♦ is better, but with a likelihood of more trumps in ♦, I'm with the passers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 ... we have 7 working HCP ...The ♥A will prevent an immediate force if played in ♠. If played in ♦, we'd (presumably) be able to ruff an opening ♥ lead, keeping control with ♥A, so I wouldn't say it's not working B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think some of these comments about heart shortness are pretty strange to me. How else is partner supposed show a really, really good hand for diamonds? AKQx xx KQxxx Ax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think some of these comments about heart shortness are pretty strange to me. How else is partner supposed show a really, really good hand for diamonds? AKQx xx KQxxx Ax? I am with Phil here. Those who suggests that pd might be looking for ♣ stopper are constructing a hand which is not unreasonable by the way; AKQxxKQxxxxxx But then he could have bid 5♦ over 3♥, no ? I dont think this shows a bad hand over a preempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I think some of these comments about heart shortness are pretty strange to me. How else is partner supposed show a really, really good hand for diamonds? AKQx xx KQxxx Ax?That's where the jump shift thing (fit jump or solid self supporting suit) comes in. Partner can't have that hand if they'd have bid 2♠ with it in the first place. Edit: deleted final sentence, 6♦ would make with the ♥ marked. Edited January 25, 2012 by Statto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Forget about strong jump shifts please. I know a lot of players that like them, but they they aren't exactly mainstream in 2/1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rduran1216 Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think some of these comments about heart shortness are pretty strange to me. How else is partner supposed show a really, really good hand for diamonds? AKQx xx KQxxx Ax? partner should bid keycard over 4S and bid 6D if u show two (or probe for 7) the issue here is that 5D shows mild slam interest I think, and with ur soft values u just have to check out in 5D. If you have AKxx in clubs or Ax in spades, thats a different story. I think partner is much more likely to hold AJxx - Kxxxx Axxx than he is to have a rock crushing 18 count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 The real question is why partner didn't double 3♥?, we would have a much happier sequence with 3NT-4♦-4♥, but he decided not to for a reason, what can it be?. Afraid of playing it there (void in hearts), or afraid of we supporting spades and then taking diamonds as a cuebid. Those are the only reasons I can think of. On the first one our ♥A is useless and we better stay low. On the second one partner will have 4162 or alike with a supper max, and 6♦ will be on a finese at worst. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 We were discussing these auctions at the weekend (the one that came up was 1C P 1H 1S P 3S 4S but the principles are similar).This is the only way that partner can show a slam try in partner's minor. With a single-suiter of his own, he can jump to 4S (which shows something extra as he didn't respond 4S), or 5S with a better hand. However he has no way of forcing with diamonds, as most people would play 4D as non-forcing. This sort of auction is when we need to have 4NT and 5d as encouraging/discouraging, so I could have bid 5D encouraging (two aces) last round. As it is, I'm guessing, and I'll probably pass. p.s. my partner would make an inverted raise with AKQx xx KQxxx Ax, but it's a matter of agreement: we are allowed to have a 4-card major if we have a 5-card minor and a slam try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think some of these comments about heart shortness are pretty strange to me. How else is partner supposed show a really, really good hand for diamonds? AKQx xx KQxxx Ax? might double and bid ♦ work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Pass yes, I think pard with those example hands at IMps needs to either start with a gf in d or double 3h, not cuebid 4h. Here I have agreed spades at the 4 level and pard is trying for slam in another suit, always a problem that perhaps a whole book could be written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I think partner is much more likely to hold AJxx - Kxxxx Axxx than he is to have a rock crushing 18 count.Would a splinter have been available and chosen with such a hand? Or might they just have bid 5♦ over 3♥? The real question is why partner didn't double 3♥?, ... Afraid of playing it there (void in hearts) ...Or perhaps afraid of playing there and missing a slam, only taking it 2-3 off. Could partner in fact be interested in a ♠ slam? If so, with a small doubleton ♥ they'd have bid 5♠, and with a singleton ♥ a keycard ask would be more likely. So if this is the case it again points to a ♥ void and wasted values, partner having something like ♠AKQJxx-♥-♦Kxx-♣KJxx or ♠AKQJxx-♥-♦KQx-♣J10xx. In the former we probably want to be in 6♠ (and can't make 5♦), but in the latter, the 5 level is the limit. How else is partner supposed show a really, really good hand for diamonds? AKQx xx KQxxx Ax?Did our opening promise 4 or 3 ♦? Could partner have started with an inverted 2♦ with such a hand? It's probably a slam try in ♦ or ♠, and it's a toughie. I'm still passing, but much more tempted to cue ♥ now I know more about your methods, in case 5♠ is making when 5♦ is off, or this is all partner needs to know (my original instinct was in fact to cue ♥), but if partner is interested in ♦ this more or less commits us to slam. Pre-empts work B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Our opening promised three diamonds, but once we didn't bid 3♠, he knows we aren't 4=4=3=2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 So if partner had something like ♠AKxx-♥xx-♦KQxx-♣AKx, this is the only way they could bid, as they couldn't have made an inverted 2♦ response to start with. Ok, I'm kind of sold on the 5♥ cue, as it should also be fine when partner was actually interested in a ♠ slam... I was originally going to reply something along the lines of: I'd cue 5♥, if it's wrong, I won't lose the post mortem. But then started thinking more deeply. If it's right to go on here, it means it probably doesn't pay to think too deeply B-) Be interested to know what partner's hand actually was, once all's said and done... :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.