GNT ATB, if any, #2

[Mbodell]

[hv=pc=n&s=s6h98dakq872ckjt6&n=skj942hatdt943caq&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1dp1sp2cp2h(FSF%20to%20game)p3dp3hp4dp5dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

(IMP teams) N/S are a new partnership playing a normal 2/1 with strong nt. FSF is forcing to game, not just 1 round (although N/S may not be on the same page on if 4m counts as game over rejected 3nt probes). If a suit is agreed, 4nt is the only keycard call (no kickbacks or minorwoods).

[phil_20686]

It feels to me that given that south has essentially denied a heart control over 2H, presuming 3d is your nothing bid, then north's 3H looks a lot like a cue and south should cooperate with 3S.

[WellSpyder]

north's 3H looks a lot like a cue

Interesting. I don't think it looks like a cue to me, just a further attempt to get a description of partner's hand. 5♦ then looks like it could be reluctant support after not hearing anything else useful. I think the auction would be clearer if north bid a forcing 4♦ rather than 3♥ on the third round.

[phil_20686]

Interesting. I don't think it looks like a cue to me, just a further attempt to get a description of partner's hand. 5♦ then looks like it could be reluctant support after not hearing anything else useful. I think the auction would be clearer if north bid a forcing 4♦ rather than 3♥ on the third round.

 

Think of all the hands north bids 4sf with, and all the hands he doesn't have. He doesn't have a hand that wants to play in clubs, he doesn't have a hand with 6 spades, north doesn't have a weak hand that just wanted to play in 3N. What further information does south have? A bit of this depends on what you would count as a stop for bidding 2N. But with 2254 a lot of people would bid 2N with as little as Jxx, or certainly Qxx, so what further information can north be seeking?

 

It seems like the only hand left over is the strong hand with diamond support, that doesnt want to bid 4d and miss a whole round of cuebidding.

[WellSpyder]

A bit of this depends on what you would count as a stop for bidding 2N. But with 2254 a lot of people would bid 2N with as little as Jxx, or certainly Qxx, so what further information can north be seeking?

I agree this is probably the key issue for deciding the best use of 3H. I don't know about you, but I find it is so rare that I have either Jxx or Qxx in a 2254 hand that it is not worth worrying about :) . With 2254 I would have thought that 2♠ was quite a likely call over the 4SF, but 1354 with Jxx might be possible for 3D, in which case a further enquiry with 3♥ could certainly be useful.

[phil_20686]

I agree this is probably the key issue for deciding the best use of 3H. I don't know about you, but I find it is so rare that I have either Jxx or Qxx in a 2254 hand that it is not worth worrying about :) . With 2254 I would have thought that 2♠ was quite a likely call over the 4SF, but 1354 with Jxx might be possible for 3D, in which case a further enquiry with 3♥ could certainly be useful.

 

obviously I meant 1354.

 

Since 2N doenst preclude playing in 5m, and partner should show his diamond/club support over this anyway. Then it makes sense to bid it often. Agree that with 2254 you can bid 2S. So what does it mean when you bid 2h-3d-3h? Partner known to be 1354 with Jxx or worse hearts and you still are looking for 3N? Are you to decide based on the difference between Jxx and xxx? Seems rare and specific.

 

Even if that were true, south has nothing in hearts and is still not sure what minor partner would like to play in given that I have no heart stop and he must have one in mind.

 

South should just bid 3s, or 4c if you would not cue shortage in partners suit here. Surely diamonds is the only suit in play for partner here.

[gnasher]

Without any agreement, isn't this 3♥ normally played as natural? I prefer to play it as more FSF, something like AQ10xx Jxx Qx Axx, but I don't think that's standard.

 

With the North hand, I'd just bid 4♦ over 3♦, especially in an unpractised partnership. Advance cue-bids should be reserved for sequences where you're sure you're on the same wavelength.

 

Looking at North's subsequent actions, it doesn't look as though he thought 3♥ agreed diamonds. If diamonds were agreed, he would have bid 5♣ rather than 5♦.

[dake50]

When was 6xD-solid to be shown?

North fears a D-loser +SA?

When was 4-support for Diamonds to be shown?

Was HA suggested? C-AQ in 2nd suit?

North has a monster opposite solid 6xD.

***

I would have jumped 4D over 4SF to show solid.

Now North is well placed to find even a grand.

[ArtK78]

North muddied the waters with his 3♥ bid which, in the absence of some agreement to the contrary, is natural.

 

A simple 4♦ call seems better, but it would not have solved the problem. South may bid RKCB, but missing all of the outside controls and having no control in hearts, it is far from clear.

 

I don't know how to bid this slam with any degree of confidence. Someone is going to have to take a unilateral action at some point - probably RKCB by South.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

3H is the worst bid.

North has to DEFINITELY agree Diam... here at the 4-level... not the 5-level.

Then 4H! ( by South ) would be kickback-RKC, which, unfortunately you don't use, so....South will bid 4NT-RKC

and play 5D if only North has only one key card or 6D w/2.

[mikeh]

I was working my way through the posts with a growing sense of incredulity as I saw the debate over 3♥.

 

Just how would we bid say AKJxx AQxxx x xx in a simple 2/1 gf method?

 

Anyone for 1♠ followed by 2♥ followed by 3♥?

 

It was a relief to see that Andy posted, and after that sanity prevailed over the 3♥ call.

 

I don't like 3♥....what was he planning to do over 4♥, as one question.

 

His concern was, presumably, that he couldn't bring himself to bypass 3N. He may have feared that his partner would have bid 3♦ on some 2=2=5=4 or even 1=3=5=4 lacking a heart card, since they are a new partnership.

 

I think he ought to have bit the bullet and committed to diamonds, via 4♦. It is far from clear that slam would have been reached...tho if S decided to cue 4♠, it would have become easy (maybe for the wrong reason).

 

As it was, over 3♥, 4♦ is weird, unless he took 3♥ as a cue, which I hope we can all see makes little sense. I think S should bid 3N, over which N should pull to 4♦. Now things become really murky, because N has described a 5=5=3=0 hand with slam interest. Oh well.

 

So both misbid and it isn't easy to assign blame.

 

FWIW, I don't think this slam is easy to reach in a basic 2/1 method.

[Phil]

Gutcheck - what is 3♥ over 2♣?

[WellSpyder]

Gutcheck - what is 3♥ over 2♣?

Indeed. For me, this jump in the 4th suit is the way to show mikeh's hand.

[mikeh]

Gutcheck - what is 3♥ over 2♣?

surely that depends on methods. I am not saying one can't play 3♥ as gf 5-5, but I, for one, prefer 5-5 invitational.

 

Would you risk 3♥ in an undiscussed partnership situation, red v white?

[phil_20686]

Gutcheck - what is 3♥ over 2♣?

 

5-5 Game forcing for most people.

[Cyberyeti]

Gutcheck - what is 3♥ over 2♣?

Splinter agreeing clubs for me

[phil_20686]

Looking at North's subsequent actions, it doesn't look as though he thought 3♥ agreed diamonds. If diamonds were agreed, he would have bid 5♣ rather than 5♦.

 

Really? looks like north did think diamonds were agreed but was unwilling to make a second slam try without a club control from south.

 

I mean this auction clearly went off the rails at 3 hearts, and north could have avoided that by bidding 4d, but that doesnt seem optimal. This is pretty much the best of all FSF auctions for standard methods, as south would have raised spades directly with three spades and a min, and bid 3 spades with three spades and 14-16, and would have bid 2s over fsf with a doubleton spade and no heart stop, so south is known to have a singleton or void spade, at least two hearts, no heart stop, and no fifth club.

 

Given those strictures, even if you play 3h as two way, as initially asking about a partial heart stop, or an advanced cue, south must cooperate with a cue for diamonds if he cannot move towards 3N? Is anyone really suggesting that any of hearts, clubs, or spades are in play for a possible strain? I would say its 100% that north cannot have 5 hearts, given he did not bid 3H initially. If he is bidding 3H as natural in a four card suit, then it can only be to help south evaluate for a diamond slam?

 

Similarly, given all the things north knows about south, if south bids 4c over 3h, then whatever 3H means, 4C must be a cue for diamonds? South has a pretty good hand for diamonds all things considered.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Gutcheck - what is 3♥ over 2♣?

Can you say Splinter ?

[Phil]

5-5 Game forcing for most people.

 

Me too - so 3♥ can be used as a punt here.

 

Still, there's a lot to be said for simplicity and just raising diamonds.

[Fluffy]

for me jump to 3♥ is 5-5 GF, 2♥+3♥ is invitational 5-5.

[kenrexford]

I think my take is different here.

 

The first four bids seem fairly normal.

 

The first question seems to be Opener's decision to bid 3♦ rather than 4♦. I have no problem with 3♦.

 

The next question is the 3♥ call. How this is clearly a cue and not possibly a notrump probe evades me. This seems like ostensibly a probe/punt call. (I am assuming that Responder could have jumped to 3♥ earlier with 5-5 majors and GF).

 

When Opener then bids 4♦, he seems to be rejecting 3NT (which makes sense) and leaving the auction flexible (which also makes sense). The suggestion that Opener bid 3♠ here seems sick, as I would expect that to show some spade tolerance, Hx?

 

Once this auction develops to this point, which seems fine to me, I think Responder owes an assumed cue of 4♥, personally, which should do the trick. That call, however, seems like the toughest call to make at the table, especially if this sequence is (as is likely) undiscussed.

[phil_20686]

When Opener then bids 4♦, he seems to be rejecting 3NT (which makes sense) and leaving the auction flexible (which also makes sense). The suggestion that Opener bid 3♠ here seems sick, as I would expect that to show some spade tolerance, Hx?

 

If you raise immediately with 35(14) shape, then its impossible for you to bid three diamonds when you have a Hx spade. You would bid 2S over 2H.

[mikeh]

So far we have people opting for 3♥ as a splinter; as a cue for diamonds; as 5-5 invitational; as ambiguous....either a try for 3N or an advance cue.

 

All of which reinforces my point about the auction: in a new partnership, wherein this sequence almost certainly hasn't been discussed, N should NOT have bid 3♥ on his actual hand (or, indeed, almost any hand!).

 

There are two types of bidders when it comes to sequences undiscussed with a relatively new partner (with long-time partners, one usually has explicit or implicit meta-rules so that one can guess how partner will think). One school avoids the ambiguous bid, even if it means making a theoretically less than ideal call that won't confuse partner, and then discusses the auction later. The other just makes the ambiguous call and hopes for the best.

 

I am one of the former, and I think the majority of serious players operate the same way in newish partnerships.

 

In that context, the auction first came off the rails with 3♥, but the alternative, of 4♦, wouldn't necessarily have got the partnership to slam.

[kenrexford]

So far we have people opting for 3♥ as a splinter; as a cue for diamonds; as 5-5 invitational; as ambiguous....either a try for 3N or an advance cue.

 

All of which reinforces my point about the auction: in a new partnership, wherein this sequence almost certainly hasn't been discussed, N should NOT have bid 3♥ on his actual hand (or, indeed, almost any hand!).

 

There are two types of bidders when it comes to sequences undiscussed with a relatively new partner (with long-time partners, one usually has explicit or implicit meta-rules so that one can guess how partner will think). One school avoids the ambiguous bid, even if it means making a theoretically less than ideal call that won't confuse partner, and then discusses the auction later. The other just makes the ambiguous call and hopes for the best.

 

I am one of the former, and I think the majority of serious players operate the same way in newish partnerships.

 

In that context, the auction first came off the rails with 3♥, but the alternative, of 4♦, wouldn't necessarily have got the partnership to slam.

 

 

Fantastic point, generally. And, as it turns out, it seems to have application to this auction by force of experience. Meaning, if people can actually have all of these meanings for 3♥, then clearly the bid must be ambiguous.

 

That said, I remain mystified by the analysis of others. One of my personal problems is not in electing to make ambiguous bids intentionally but in failing to understand when a call actually is ambiguous. In other words, in a real life bidding sequence, I would not bid 3♥ out of disrespect for the ambiguity, expecting partner to field something. Rather, it would not even occur to me that 3♥ could have all of these meanings to people.

 

I mean, 5-5 invitational, for instance, makes no sense, as 2♥ was defined as GF. How can you force game with one call and then later have a call defined as "I was just kidding with that GF stuff?"

 

The splinter meaning makes no sense to me, as an undiscussed non-jump is rarely treated as a splinter, if ever.

 

The cue meaning makes little sense to me, as (1) game before slam suggests that we need 3♥ as a punt for probe purposes and (2) there is no reason in this auction that diamonds must be the sole focus suit (what about clubs?). 3♥ as "punt" therefore seems like the only plausible meaning.

 

But, again, I am clearly wrong in my assessment, not of what the call might ideally mean at least in my world but of the solidity of my convictions in the mind of a random partner.

[awm]

I think there are really only two meanings for 3h: its either a natural 5+/5+ GF in the majors or its a punt/stopper ask. Unfortunately these are pretty opposite as to what partner should do!