Who should apologize? ATB

[Hanoi5]

Teams, 2/1.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skq7hq7daq76543ct&n=saj6hakt93dj8ca85&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=p1hp2dp2np3dp3s(cue-bid)p4dp4np5c(1-4)p5dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

After the hand is over and 12 tricks are taken (by the way the ♦10 was led, East covered the Jack with the King, do you finesse or play for the drop?):

 

North: Why didn't you cue-bid clubs?

South: 3♠ might be still looking for 3NT

North: You had to cue-bid clubs! I thought we had a loser there

South: and if 3♠ is a cue-bid, why didn't you cue-bid hearts?

[mgoetze]

100% North.

[aguahombre]

Neither should apologize. They should sit at the bar, later, and rethink their agreements.

 

If we accept 3S as a cooperative cue for a diamond slam under the given conditions (1H opening), then the conversation can continue about the shape shown by 2NT already, the advisability of using 4NT for Wood when a minor is trump, etc.

 

If, the pair decides 1NT would have been the correct opening bid, then a whole different discussion of methods would ensue.

 

Actually, if 2NT guarantees two diamonds (which it should), I would recommend 4D after 3S as a "take-over" RKC right there.

[the hog]

I would have opened 1NT. The hand is balanced and in the correct range. South should bid 4C over 3S.

Both pairs are to blame; certainly not 100% Nth.

[Hanoi5]

Actually, that was gonna be a second question on this hand, is the north hand a 1NT (15-17) opening bid?

 

I would consider it too strong for that. I see two people here don't, any other thoughts on the matter?

[Statto]

Assuming you open 1NT with all 5M-332 in range, it looks too strong with the good spots in ♥, prime cards in other suits, and generally the high cards where you want them to be.

[aguahombre]

If, the pair decides 1NT would have been the correct opening bid, then a whole different discussion of methods would ensue.

 

 

I would consider it too strong for that. I see two people here don't, any other thoughts on the matter?

Agree with you, and pls note there was only one above your follow-up post who stated 1NT was the right opening. I merely mentioned that if the pair decides 1NT should have been opened, their discussion would take a different tack.

 

I liked the auction thru 3S, and suggested a Minorwood interpretation of 4D.

[Codo]

Too strong for 1 NT, even if you play that style.

 

What to bid after 3 ♦ is tricky. I doubt that it is certain to anybody that 3 ♥ would be a cuebid for diamonds.

 

4 ♦ was a nothing bid. Even if partner makes a "probe for 3 NT" it is not forbidden to show the hand.

[Nabooba]

Too strong for 1 NT, even if you play that style.

 

What to bid after 3 ♦ is tricky. I doubt that it is certain to anybody that 3 ♥ would be a cuebid for diamonds.

 

4 ♦ was a nothing bid. Even if partner makes a "probe for 3 NT" it is not forbidden to show the hand.

 

I would also open 1NT playing 15-17. You play 14-16 then announce that! Sometimes you can have a maximum for your bid. What do you mean "that" style? Do you open balanced hands with some other bid?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Teams, 2/1.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skq7hq7daq76543ct&n=saj6hakt93dj8ca85&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=p1hp2dp2np3dp3s(cue-bid)p4dp4np5c(1-4)p5dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

1H - 2D! ( GF )

2NT* - 3D ( extra length )

3NT - 4D**

4H ( 1st step = 0/3 ) - 6D ( Rule: "Might as well bid 6 as 5D does not score well if 3NT+ were making"; Opener showing "extras" has a lot to do with this decision also; 2H! instead of 2NT would have shown "any minimum" )

 

My system:

*2NT = "extras" ( 15+ ), denies 4 cards ♠ ( Edit: Alternate bidding to 2NT shows minimum open w/o 4 cards ♠:

......... 1H - 2D!, 2H!( any min ) - 2S! ( asks ), 2NT .... )

3NT = denies extra ♥length (Edit: 3H instead would have shown extra ♥ length )

**4D = does not relish NT; might as well take this as Minorwood when going past 3NT... and no other suit is "in the picture" .

Edited March 2, 2012 by TWO4BRIDGE

[gnasher]

I agree with North's upgrade.

 

I think 3♠ should be a try for 3NT, and doesn't promise spade control - I'd bid it with QJx AKxxx Kxx xx. On South's actual hand he knows he opposite ♠A, but doesn't know he's opposite a slam try.

 

Opposite 3♠, 4♣ would suggest slam interest opposite a weak notrump. For slam to be good opposite a weak notrump, South needs to find partner with specifically Axx AKxxx Kx xxx. That probably justifies a 4♣ bid, but I can see why South didn't do it.

 

After South's 4♦, I think it's reasonable for North to drive slam. Even if he thinks South has denied a club control, slam is still cold opposite KQx x AQ10xxxx xx and good opposite KQx Qx AQ10xxx xx.

[Fluffy]

if north thinks there is no club control in south´s hand he shouldn´t bid keycard. 4♥ is easiest.

 

north´s 3♠ shows stopper, not necesarilly control

 

south´s 4♦ is hopeless. He has set trumps already with 3♦ so no reason to bypass a control.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

He has set trumps already with 3♦ so no reason to bypass a control.

Does 3♦ really "set" trumps ?

Some might say 3♦ is "weak" ( a minimum 2/1 initially ) and 4♦ "weaker still" .

[Cyberyeti]

I would also open 1NT playing 15-17. You play 14-16 then announce that! Sometimes you can have a maximum for your bid. What do you mean "that" style? Do you open balanced hands with some other bid?

This is not a 17 count, it's better than that.

 

I'd routinely open 1N on many 17 counts with 5 hearts, but here you have 2 aces and an AK, plus the 109 of hearts.

 

Compare with:

 

KJx

Axxxx

KJx

AJ

 

How many tricks do you take opposite say

 

Q109x

Qxx

AQx

KQx

 

10 or 11 most of the time, compare this with the original hand where you have excellent chances of 12 tricks.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

3S is value showing, unless 3D was already showing SI,

which I doubt.

 

4D showed SI, 4NT got the information we have 1KC, North

bids 6D, next bord.

North knowes, the partnership is missing only 1KC, and would

South really show SI with A10xxxx?

The only reason not to bid 6 D is the fear, the trump suit

is not reasonable, which is ...

 

Hence the blame goes to North, th whole discussion about the

meaning of 3S is ...

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Actually, that was gonna be a second question on this hand, is the north hand a 1NT (15-17) opening bid?

 

I would consider it too strong for that. I see two people here don't, any other thoughts on the matter?

If 5 cards majors are allowed, this is a 1NT opening bid, you have Jx, and AJx, why should the hand be

stronger than 17HCP?

Move the Jack of diamonds to hearts, and we may start talking.

 

We dont open 1NT with a 5 card major, but this is partnership agreement.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[aguahombre]

It seems the upgraders have the support of the KNR toy (18.65).

[mich-b]

Whatever each partner may think about the early rounds of bidding , once North has Key-Carded , and found out there are not 2 aces missing it is his responsibility to bid slam.

If he still isn't sure - he should not have bid 4NT. Bidding 4NT and signing off when there are enough aces is a poor approach.

[mikeh]

1. Opening 1N as North seems silly to me. People who look only at the hcp are missing an important aspect of hand valuation. This is clearly worth upgrading. We have 7 controls, and 4321 undervalues controls, and we have a good 5 card suit, where the 4321 count gives no weight to the extra winner we can expect.

 

 

2. 3♠ as a cuebid makes no sense unless the partnership plays that 3♦ 'sets trump' and eliminates 3N. For so long as 3N is in play (and why wouldn't it be), 3-level bids are probes for that contract. In addition, unless 3♦ sets trump, it is a basic bidding error to cuebid before setting trump. When one partner makes an 'inferential cuebid' and the other partner isn't sure what it is, madness ensues.

 

3.North has a slam try opposite a 2/1 with rebiddable diamonds, especially since S didn't make a vanilla sign off in 3N. I like 4N over 3♦ provided that this is seen as natural.....18-19 balanced, which is what we hold if we learn how to value our holdings.

 

S has a clear 6♦ call over that.

 

How would I keycard? Well, I don't like keycarding when the answer won't let me place the contract with confidence, and how can N count tricks after finding S with 1 keycard? But if I were forced to, it would be 4♥ over 3♦, as kickback, or I'd bid 4♦ to set trump and then 4N, if kickback were not available.

 

For those whose methods use 4N as keycard at every opportunity......firstly, I suggest a serious rethink and second, bid 4♦ over 3♦ to at least give you more room and another round of bidding, such that you'll hopefully know a little more.

[wyman]

Agree with 1H-2D; 2N-3D [north is far too good for a 1N opener]

 

I don't think 3S is a cue (N may be minimal and worried about 3N), so I think N should bid 4D agreeing trump (and not RKC). 4S by south, and now north can bid 4N RKC, after which you'll play 6D (notwithstanding north's inexplicable 5D bid on this hand).

[Fluffy]

Some might say 3♦ is "weak" ( a minimum 2/1 initially ) and 4♦ "weaker still" .

 

I don´t know the some you are reffering to. 3NT is weak, not 3♦.

 

And you say those "someones" think that bidding 4m over 3NT is weaker?, then I don´t care what they think really.

 

 

BTW: set trumps doesn´t mean we neccesarilly explore for slam, it means we play in that suit, unless we play in NT

[aguahombre]

Enjoyed Mikeh's items number 2 and three especially.

 

No doubt, this hand is a proper upgrade from the 1NT range. Another perspective: For us, after

 

1H-2D

?.....3NT instead of 2NT shows that exact distribution (3-5-2-3) and also 18-19 ---one of those specialized unnessesary jumps in a 2/1 auction which narrowly describe. This would allow South to be the one in a position to take over; and South, unlike North, can pretty much count tricks.

 

1H-2D

3N-? Your choice of Minorwood or Kickback for diamonds according to taste, and South places the contract.

[bluecalm]

I hope 2NT promised extras ? It seems unplayable if it's 12-21.

Now I think if 2NT promised extras then I wouldn't split hairs and just bid 3NT with minimum's (as we have 26-27+hcp guaranteed) so 3S should be a cue bid.

Regardless of what 3S is though why responder didn't bid 4C is mystery to me. If we still need some mechanism to find out about hcp ranges then 4D bid during cuebids by either player could show minimum (similar to non-serious 3NT) but you don't skip cuebids when doing this so:

 

1H - 2D

2N - 3D

3S - ???

-4C = cuebid, nothing about strength

-4D = minimum, no club cuebid

-4H = heart cuebid, no club cuebid, max

 

After 4C opener bids 4D with min and cuebids with max and there we go.

 

Now if we are into system design of course it sucks to go beyond 3NT on minimum hands so after 3D one of 3S/3H calls could be used as minimum after which responder bids 3NT if he has no further slam interest.

[gnasher]

I hope 2NT promised extras ? It seems unplayable if it's 12-21.

In 2/1 it's usually played as split-range, either 11-14 or 18+.

[Finch]

I would also open 1NT playing 15-17. You play 14-16 then announce that! Sometimes you can have a maximum for your bid. What do you mean "that" style? Do you open balanced hands with some other bid?

 

If you include a 5-card major in your 1NT openings and you play a 'normal' style 15-17 1NT then this hand is too strong. "15-17" is usually taken to mean nowadays "very good 14 to most 17s", although there are certainly people around who play it as somewhat stronger.

 

Personally I open balanced hands with a 5-card major 1 of the major, as does quite a large proportion of the (non-US) bridge playing world. You would do well to lay off the sarcasm.