More Hand Evaluation

[ArtK78]

12 board match. IMPs converted to VPs.[hv=pc=n&n=sa93h983d6432ca62&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp2cp2dp2hp2sp3dp3hp4hp]133|250|[/hv]

 

2♦ - Game forcing artificial (2♥ would be negative).

2♥ - Kokish. Either natural or strong balanced.

2♠ - Forced unless responder has long suit.

3♦ - Natural - hearts & diamonds.

3♥ - Fit, better than 4♥.

 

Note that North's original pass denied a hand as good as 10 HCP.

 

Would you take another bid with the North hand?

[quiddity]

umm.. yes?

[wyman]

I do.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

6♥.

 

Opener has lots of stuff in his 5+♥ and 4+♦ suit ... with shortness in either or both blacks.

 

And you have the 2 black bullets to go along with the double-fit.

[JLOGIC]

This reminds me of a hand from the bermuda bowl where our teammates got to 6H off two aces and made it. Partners hand was like 5 solid 5 solid or soemthing, but our teammate bid 4D with that whereas bobby levin bid 4H. Going with that I will bid 7D lol

[mikeh]

This reminds me of a hand from the bermuda bowl where our teammates got to 6H off two aces and made it. Partners hand was like 5 solid 5 solid or soemthing, but our teammate bid 4D with that whereas bobby levin bid 4H. Going with that I will bid 7D lol

Your team also got to 6♣ on a hand missing 2 Aces and an inescapable heart loser....however, dummy held KQ tight in spades with declarer being 0=7=1=5, and we led the spade A....opening leader held only that Ace.

 

void AJxxxxx x AKxxx opposite KQ xx KQJxx QJxx if I recall.....1♥ (1♠)...our teammate bid 2♦ and couldn't find the club slam (?) after 4th chair bounced.....your teammate doubled and opener took a reasonable shot at 6♣ after the same bounce. I still think I, as fourth chair, ought to have bid diamonds at some stage with my Jxxxx Kx Axxxx x. Oh well.

 

It goes to show that sometimes keycard just gets in the way :P

 

Oh..and I'm not claiming we would have beaten you if we'd beaten the slam.....we were blitzed as I recall :D

[MrAce]

Seems to me the hand types that slam is not good and 5 maybe in danger are the ones similar to

 

KQ

AKxxx

AQxx

KJ

 

KQ

AKQJx

QJxx

KQ

 

He could perhaps bid 3NT over 3♥ if that is not a convention, or he could have bid 2NT over 2♦ with those ? Probably.

 

Regardless tho, if we are going to make a move now (which i think we should) and that our goal was not to settle in game, then why didnt we support ♦ previous round ?

[HighLow21]

I can't imagine the odds against 6♥ are worse than 30%, even without having an Ace or keycard count yet. The 2♣ bid should show at most 4 losers, and North's hand fills 2 of them. The diamond length makes it probable that a 3rd hole is filled. The outside aces are always worth a trick. The risk of losing a black suit trick is near zero. So the primary risk is losing two red suit tricks.

 

One thing I always find helpful is to imagine a minimum hand for which 6♥ is essentially cold. If you can, then slam is probably a good bet.

 

Here's one: ♠Kx ♥AKQJ5 ♦AQJ95 ♣x.

 

This makes 6♥ unless RHO has a diamond void, or hearts are 5-0. This is about a 9% fail rate.

 

And partner could be stronger.

 

Sure, there are plenty of hands where 6♥ or even 5♥ could fail, but the reward seems higher than the risk here. Bid 4NT (or whatever ace-asking convention you're using) and go to 6 unless you're off two aces (or two keycards). If you do so and go -1 in 5♥, chalk it up as extremely unlucky and expect to have plenty of company.

[ArtK78]

I chose to pass 4♥, and we missed a good (but by no means cold) slam:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s72hakj762dakqtc4&n=sa93h983d6432ca62]133|200[/hv]

 

Partner, having overbid his hand significantly, was annoyed that we could not get to this slam after he opened 2♣. In his opinion, he could have had the ♥Q instead of the ♥2. I can't really argue the point.

 

Perhaps I should raise diamonds. 7♦ is cold on most (but not all) hands on which 6♥ makes, and 6♦ makes on a non-spade lead when there is a heart loser but diamonds are 3-2.

[rogerclee]

I'd rather bid 7D than pass.

[HighLow21]

I don't think your partner overbid at all. The hand has 4 quick tricks and 3.5-4 losers. To me those are the minimum requirements (>=4 QT's and <=4 losers) for opening 2♣ with the intention of rebidding a suit. (You can have more losers if you plan to rebid in NT. For example, ♠AKQJ ♥KJT9 ♦Q98 ♣AKT has ~5 losers but enough HCP for 2♣.)

[Zelandakh]

For example, ♠AKQJ ♥KJT9 ♦Q98 ♣AKT has ~5 losers but enough HCP for 2♣.)

 

Since when has a balanced 23 count not been enough for a 2♣ opener?

[Fluffy]

I think Timo has it right, if we are going to move over 4♥ then we should had bid 4♦ earlier.

 

The best and only way to bid it now is to blast 6♦ and let partner pick.

[rhm]

Seems to me the hand types that slam is not good and 5 maybe in danger are the ones similar to

 

KQ

AKxxx

AQxx

KJ

 

KQ

AKQJx

QJxx

KQ

 

He could perhaps bid 3NT over 3♥ if that is not a convention, or he could have bid 2NT over 2♦ with those ? Probably.

 

Regardless tho, if we are going to make a move now (which i think we should) and that our goal was not to settle in game, then why didnt we support ♦ previous round ?

I can not imagine bidding 4♥ with those hands over 3♥. Playing 3NT conventional when partner has only given preference to hearts can not be right.

But if you do for some silly reasons, you would have to rebid 2NT with those hands.

I can not see passing 4♥ with responders hand, but neither do I understand 6♥.

Bidding 6♦ after you gave preference to hearts already must be better at all forms of scoring. Opener will correct when 6♥ is superior.

If opener passes 6♦ I can not imagine 6♥ to be a better contract. Opener could well be 5-5 in the red suits.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[HighLow21]

Since when has a balanced 23 count not been enough for a 2♣ opener?

 

Zekandakh, I said in my post above that it is indeed enough to open 2♣. I was pointing it out as an example of a balanced 2♣ opener that has more losers that the QT/loser count parameters I'd specified earlier in the post for semi-balanced or unbalanced hands.

[Phil]

For example, ♠AKQJ ♥KJT9 ♦Q98 ♣AKT has ~5 losers but enough HCP for 2♣.)

 

This is the 2nd time you've spewed out a hand in the A/E that had an incorrect number of cards.

[HighLow21]

This is the 2nd time you've spewed out a hand in the A/E that had an incorrect number of cards.

OK fair point; remove a red 9. What was the first?

[Phil]

OK fair point; remove a red 9. What was the first?

 

That said, all partner needs for slam to be cold is Ax KQx AJxxx KJ. This isn't much above a minimum and has 5 wasted points.

[HighLow21]

 

 

Sometimes in my frenetic attempt to get my point across I forget to count my x's. Noted.

[Zelandakh]

My apologies for that HighLow, I misread your earlier post. This is unfortunately all too easy to do when scanning through threads. Similarly for making typos in posting hands - I would not worry about this too much unless it becomes something of a habit.

[dake50]

Another 'lower 2C rule' hand.!

Playing a 1C force with asking bids:

1C-1S(C-xfer or 8+ no suggested suit)-

2H(H-ask?)- 3C(3+H,no top)-

3D(D-ask?)- 3N(3+D,no top)-

4C(Aces?)- 4S(2)- 6-best red.

Not even a problem.

How low will 2C go???

Once was 23+HCP. Then 9+tricks. Now even 8+tricks.

When do 2C-ers decide strong starts 1C-force?

Never when 2C can be 15-shapely.

[HighLow21]

I'm sure I'll get a lot of flak for quoting Marty Bergen here, but I like what he said on the matter-->"If the idea of having your opening bid passed out at the one level makes your stomach turn, open 2♣."

 

A similar thought would be something like: "If you can make a game opposite the majority of hands that would pass opposite a 1-level opening, open 2♣."

[ahydra]

I once opened 2C on a 18-count 5-5 which only needed SQxx opposite for game, and it ended in disaster. Serves me right for playing with a conservative partner perhaps, but it's scared me off, and now I want 3-loser hands or better to open 2C (when they don't have 22+ HCPs).

 

So I open the hand 1H, likely hear 2H from partner (assuming 5cM) and then... ugh :( Let's abuse a 3D natural game try (planning to bid game anyway). Partner bids 4D, showing diamond fit and accepting the try. Now we roll out our favourite RKC variant and get to slam (in diamonds, since partner can't have the HQ if he has two aces).

 

Does anyone have a good method for showing strong 6-4 hands after 1X-2X or 1X-3X? 4-level bids sound like cuebids.

 

ahydra

[phil_20686]

I would not have opened this hand 2C. It seems like a fairly normal 1h opener, and then a 3d GF over partners one level response. I do not particularly object to a style where this is 2C. Its a pretty good hand. I also dislike 2c openers on two suited hands, and avoid them when possible, as it tends to complicate things. I don't pass much over 1M, so its less dangerous to open 1H than for some.

 

I would have driven a slam with two aces. There are lots of decisions about how to bid this hand. I would have just bid 6d now I suspect. I think its clear to bid 3h over 3d, and then I would expect my partners to bid 4c with this hand, then I can bid 4d last train to show my spade control. If partner signs off now I would bid 4S. if I can tempt a keycard bid form partner that will tell him everything. If partner still signs off in 5H perhaps I have done enough.

 

I think here since there was no cue bidding, you just have to drive a slam. I would choose 6d now, as I already showed my 3 hearts ( I would hardly show FP when I have 4 diamonds, and I must have 4D to bid 6d now). Partner can decide for himself.

[phil_20686]

I once opened 2C on a 18-count 5-5 which only needed SQxx opposite for game, and it ended in disaster. Serves me right for playing with a conservative partner perhaps, but it's scared me off, and now I want 3-loser hands or better to open 2C (when they don't have 22+ HCPs).

 

So I open the hand 1H, likely hear 2H from partner (assuming 5cM) and then... ugh :( Let's abuse a 3D natural game try (planning to bid game anyway). Partner bids 4D, showing diamond fit and accepting the try. Now we roll out our favourite RKC variant and get to slam (in diamonds, since partner can't have the HQ if he has two aces).

 

Does anyone have a good method for showing strong 6-4 hands after 1X-2X or 1X-3X? 4-level bids sound like cuebids.

 

ahydra

 

Kokish two-way game tries work well for me. So, initially game tries, 2S= what suit would partner accept a game try in, 2n/3c/3d = short suit game tries. Here I would start with a short suit game try (0-1), and partner with two bullets for his (simple) raise, should cue, I will cue and partner will know I have a slam try with short clubs. Also makes auto splinters void showing which is useful on occasion.

 

After 1x-3x I play long suit cuebids. Possible to play 1h-3h-3s as Any shortage, 3N asks, since you never want to play in 3N after 1M-3M. Works well for 5431 and 6331 hands if you can show the shortage. Obviously then 1h-3h-3N = long suit spades.