grand exploration

[Fluffy]

♠Axx

♥AKQxx

♦Ax

♣Kxx

 

1♣-1♥

1♠-2♦

2♥-3♥

3♠-4♣

4♦-4NT

5♣-??

 

At this point partner could still be 4315, 4324 or 4333, if balanced he is 12-14 but his 3♠ and 4♦ cuebids put him in the top of the range. If unbalanced he is initially 11-16, but lack of jump to 3♥ together with cuebids put him in the middle of the range most likelly.

 

 

5♠ and 6♣ ask about ♠Q/♣Q, 5NT asks about Kings, partner will show ♦K if he is balanced or maybe jump to 7 if he thinks he has enough tricks.

[Phil]

5♥??

[ahydra]

Yes, 5H looks a little odd (how many aces are there in the deck?!) Is partner showing a void, do you think?

 

I think I would ask for the CQ since he is likely 4315.

 

ahydra

[Fluffy]

sorry sorry, its 5♣ showing one.

[aguahombre]

I think I would ask for the CQ since he is likely 4315.

If we could infer from our style that the 1S rebid + the 2H continuation after 4SF indeed showed 4-3-1-5, this hand would have been a snap. Responder would have set Clubs rather than hearts at the 3-level, then wooded for the Club AQ and another King...converting to the heart grand at the end.

[gnasher]

We can't possibly make the decision, given how little we know about partner's shape.

 

I think we should bid 5NT. Partner will then know about all of our high cards, and he'll know we have five hearts, so he'll usually be able to count tricks.

[Zelandakh]

If you get an answer to RKCB and don't know what to do after hearing the answer it was probably the wrong bid. The problem here is the system which has you at the 5 level without even knowing if partner is balanced or not, nor managed to narrow down their range very much. How about bidding 4♠ over 4♦? If partner now bids 4NT we can show 4 with 5♣ and then show the ♥Q and ♣K over 5♦ with 6♣. If partner instead bids 5♣ we can continue with 5♦. Partner will probably bid 5♥ over that, worried about the trumps, but we can push on with 6♥ which I think shows a try with nothing more to show with a cue bid.

 

Finally, a little conundrum to answer. Partner bid 2♥ over our 4th suit forcing but then later made a diamond cue bid. Does the 2♥ bid deny as much as ♦Kx in your partnership style? What about ♦Kxx? If so then the last one or two of your hand shapes are impossible and the 4♦ cue was based on a singleton. In this case you should know exactly what to do after the RKCB response and the first paragraph was moot.

[Phil]

We can't possibly make the decision, given how little we know about partner's shape.

 

I think we should bid 5NT. Partner will then know about all of our high cards, and he'll know we have five hearts, so he'll usually be able to count tricks.

 

Exactly. This guarantees possession of the missing keys, and we've shown the ♣K. Partner should be in a good position to make the final decision.

[mikeh]

If we could infer from our style that the 1S rebid + the 2H continuation after 4SF indeed showed 4-3-1-5, this hand would have been a snap. Responder would have set Clubs rather than hearts at the 3-level, then wooded for the Club AQ and another King...converting to the heart grand at the end.

Agreed: this is a great advertisement for rebidding 1N with all balanced hands lacking 4♥. I think those who disdain the approach underestimate how powerful it is.

 

However, we can't retrobid, and in any event, were he to have shown a balanced hand, we still wouldn't be sure what to do, since he could have, say, KQxx Jxx Kx AJxx which would be (just) enough to make grand worth bidding.

 

As it is, I don't think any of the tools we have (and I wouldn't have any better ones at this point) allow us to place the contract with assurance.

 

Possession of a specific black Q won't let us count to 13, and, ironically, denial of any specific black Q won't mean we don't have 13 tops. So asking about either is a waste of time.

 

I think the best we can do is to bid 5N. At least partner will be able to bid 7 on some of the hands on which it is cold. It is important that our first cue was in clubs, since (at least the way I like to play) that would always be a high card control, not shortness. In my opinion, when one's first cue is in a suit partner has shown it should be a high card.

 

Now at least he'll value AQJxx correctly and maybe AQxxx.

[inquiry]

I guess your partner would not bypass 1♠ with balanced hand and rebid 1NT.

 

Also, were you playing serious or non-serious 3NT?

 

 

Even if partner was 4315, he would need the club queen or the spade KQJX (or perhaps KQTX) to have a chance. The best you can do now, I think is to bid 5NT and hope partner can count tricks, which he probably will not be able to do.

 

The problem here is that you didn't tell your partner about your club king, I think you could have forseen this problem when you bid 3♠. A better approach, I think is to bid 4♣ instead of 3♠ (to tell parnter about your club king). This has two advantages. First, partner will signoff without the spade king (fear of two quick spade losers), 2nd he will either cuebid 4♦ with a diamond control (plus spade king) or perhaps bid 4♦ as last train with a spade control (neutral about the diamond control), or bid 4♥. Over 4♥, you can now bid 4nt, get the 5♣ response, and then bid 5NT... PARTNER knowing about all the key cards, plus the spade king will be much better placed to pick the level. And of course, if over 4♣ partner bids 4♦ (regardless if cuebid or last train), you will be even better placed in the auction.

[mikeh]

The problem here is that you didn't tell your partner about your club king, I think you could have forseen this problem when you bid 3♠.

Ben: take another look at the auction :P

 

(At least, I think we bid 4♣...maybe it's me who needs to look again!)

[mike777]

5nt now

 

 

Pard bid 3s we bid 4c so pard should know about our club K.

 

 

as MikeH mentioned pard shouldknow every hcp in our hand now.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

If we don't know for sure whether partner has 3, 4 or 5 cards ♣, I think you have to ask for both Queens:

 

... ask for the ♠Q first with 5S....and if he has it, then ask for the ♣next .

 

If he has that one too, then

 

...you can count to 13 tricks with either shape:

 

A ) If 4 3 2 4 or 4 3 3 3, then his 4D! cue was the ♦K : 3s, 5h, 2d, 3c = 13 tricks

 

B) If 4 3 1 5, then the 4D! cue was singleton : 3s, 5h, 1d, 5c = 14 tricks

 

But you would be miss bidding the grand if he denies the ♠Q:

... The grand would NOT be there with hand A, but

... The 13 tricks would still be there with hand B : 2s, 5h, 1d, 5c

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

And in all cases, we are assuming 3-2 splits ( or useful J ) in ♥ and ♣.

Edited May 8, 2012 by TWO4BRIDGE

[Fluffy]

all 5♠, 5NT and 6♣ show all keycards and are susceptible of being raised to grand. Do you think our hand cannot conceivably have singleton club when we bid 4♣? I think 4♣ is fine if we have somthing like Axx AKQJxx Axx x, splintering around is not very useful.

 

Partner has:

 

♠KQ10x

♥xxx

♦Kx

♣AQxx

 

Raising to 7♥ works poorly, LHO has 3433 and 7NT is cold. If partner knows ♣K is there then he has no excus to avoid the winning spot.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Fluffy

[Phil]

Do you think our hand cannot conceivably have singleton club when we bid 4♣? I think 4♣ is fine if we have somthing like Axx AKQJxx AQx x, splintering around is not very useful.

 

I cannot cue shortness in partner's bid suit by agreement. What's wrong with 4♦ with this hand?

[inquiry]

Ben: take another look at the auction :P

 

(At least, I think we bid 4♣...maybe it's me who needs to look again!)

 

whoops... i got lost in the auction... so partner has shown the ♠K, and we have shown the ♣K (do not cuebid shortness in partners suit), so 5NT will be great bid now.

[kenrexford]

I echo everyone who says that 5NT is obvious, because partner will know exactly what we have and can decide.

 

Strangely, however, this creates an interesting situation. As stated, partner knows our entire hand as a matter of the miimum that we could hold. However, we could have more than what is advertised. So, what are partners' bids other than 6♥, 6NT, 7♥, and 7NT supposed to be?

 

I mean, take for instance a call of 6♣ by Opener. He knows that I have the club King, and he knows that I know that he does not have the club King. 6♣ would normally show the club King, but that meaning obviously is impossible now. I would think that it shows the Queen and a need for me to have something more to consider the grand. In other words, I would suspect that 6♣ essentially invites a grand back if I have the club Jack (i.e., Opener has AQxx and figures that the club Jack would be the best 13th trick opportunity out there).

[Phil]

He knows that I have the club King, and he knows that I know that he does not have the club King. 6♣ would normally show the club King, but that meaning obviously is impossible now. I would think that it shows the Queen and a need for me to have something more to consider the grand. In other words, I would suspect that 6♣ essentially invites a grand back if I have the club Jack (i.e., Opener has AQxx and figures that the club Jack would be the best 13th trick opportunity out there).

 

I have had situations like this where both partners know whom has what. I would take 6♣ to show the ♣Q as you say, and I don't think its an unusual agreement.

 

We are still one trick away from a grand at this point. Responder can only count 3♠ + 5♥ + 1♦ + 3♣, although 6N now becomes the stopping point.