If only I had asked for Aces and then Kings

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I figured partner had to have "something" in ♦ ( ie no two quick losers ) for his ♥-splinter when I held the 3 top ♠ and the ♣ A.... So I just blasted to 6S ... not wanting to allow the opps a lead directing DBL .. or some such .

[hv=pc=n&s=sakq96ha62d976ca9&n=s8543h7dakqjt2c64&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1sp4h(splinter)p6sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Well, I was right about the " no two quick losers in ♦ " .

[BunnyGo]

I don't think that a heart splinter accurately describes p's hand. I think a 2♦ bid followed by spades and spades does better.

[mcphee]

is the hand with the 4 card S support better shown with the rebid of 4D showing 6 running D and 4 card S support?

[Codo]

4 ♦ would be a diamond splinter, so no, you cannot use it for a running suit with spade support.

4 ♥ was a bad bid. Okay it describes usually 11-14 HCPS, 4 card trump support and short hearts. So for beancounters a nearly perfect describtion.

But it does not describe this powerhouse at all.

[Quartic]

I would jump to 3♦ with this north hand (strong jump shift) and then support spades next round. Partner should now be able to bid the grand.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I would jump to 3♦ with this north hand (strong jump shift) and then support spades next round. Partner should now be able to bid the grand.

For us, 1M - 3D! = Bergen Limit Raise

[Statto]

Asking about Kings doesn't help, you still don't know if your 3rd ♦ loser and ♣ loser can be covered. Oh, that was the point B-)

[awm]

South's 6s bid is rather lazy. It is not hard to construct hands like xxxx x akx kqxx or even xxxx x akx kxxxx where the grand is very good.

[the hog]

I don't like the splinter with this source of tricks in Ds.

[JLOGIC]

Regardless of how good or bad the 4H bid was, there is no way it should have failed here. South needs little for grand, and was definitely lazy to not bid 4N 5N.

 

Before you jump to 6 instead of bidding 4N then 5N, ask yourself "if partner drives to 7 over 4N then 5N, will that be bad?" If the answer to that is no, then you should do so unless it is zero % that partner can ever drive to 7.

 

On this hand, it will obviously be cold if he does, and it's obviously possible, me might have KQJx of clubs and AQx of diamonds. He might have the AKQx of diamonds and CK. Etc etc. By jumping to 6 you said that 7 was impossible if partner wanted to bid it knowing that you had all the keycards, this is clearly not true.

[WellSpyder]

Asking about Kings doesn't help, you still don't know if your 3rd ♦ loser and ♣ loser can be covered. Oh, that was the point B-)

No, I think the point was that partner would know what to do if you asked for Aces and then Kings. Although 4N then 5N look like asking bids, they are also telling partner something. When you say you are interested in kings by bidding 5N you must be looking for a grand, so partner knows there aren't any immediate losers. In that case it doesn't take a genius to see that North has the tricks that are needed regardless of whether there are kings missing or not.

[Statto]

Good point :)

[Zelandakh]

Playing 2/1 I also think this is a 2♦ response but some folks play stuff that would not allow this route. If you do ask for key cards after 4♥ then it should probably go 1♠ - 4♥; 4NT - 5♣; 5♥ - 7♦; 7NT. The 7♦ bid should show that the jump to grand is based on a solid diamond suit which allows Responder to count 13 without a ruff.

 

What else is available? Well if you play traditional (first round) cues at the 5 level then it could possibly go 1♠ - 4♥; 5♣ - 5♦; 5♥ - 5NT; 7♠ - 7NT. Plus, of course, if you were playing split-range splinters then you could treat the North hand as the "in-between" range, after which South will definitely be looking for the grand: 1♠ - 2NT; 3♣ - 4♥; 4NT - 5♣; 5♥ - 7♦; 7NT, for example.