Slam auction

[antonylee]

Can you bid to 6♣ (or more, if you like 50% grands) on these hands?

[hv=pc=n&s=sa5hkqj86dkj3cqjt&n=st863hada7ca97654&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1hp1sp2dp3cp4cp4dp4hp5cppp]266|200[/hv]

I gave the auction I had last night (playing regular 2/1 with a pickup partner). His 4♦ looked like showing shortness to me so I gave up after his skipping the spade cue. My solution below...

 

 

I think I should have bid 3♦ (naturalish) over 3♣, now he can bid 3N and on the next round his 4♦ will look like ♦Ax(x).

 

[mike777]

since you are looking for a spade cue I would just cue 4h over 4c

You can forsee the problem if you start with 4d ovre 4c

 

I assume pards 4c is already a slam try.

 

in any event bidding minor suit slams with a pick up pard is always hard.

[antonylee]

Interesting, however with my regular partner 4♠ would be LTTC (♦ control, but -usually- no ♠ control). Well actually it wouldn't because we would be in a minorwood auction but that's what it would be were we in a major instead.

[Yu18772]

First - I think that if p doesn't have spade control and diamond q was shortness he is pretty much bound to have A♥ and AK♣ 6th. Of course he could have exactly QJxx,xx,Q,AKxxxx, but thats pretty much the only holding that I could come up with that would fit your understanding of the auction and not make slam.... on the other hand you potentially may be missing a grand if partner holds 7 clubs and diamond void, so 6♣ seems to me like a good bid regardless.

Rebidding 4th suit without prior discussion may lead to greater disasters than missing 6♣....but personally i didnt like the 4♣ bid, unless 3♣ secured 6 clubs. What would random partner rebid with Qxxx, Ax, xxx, AKxx over 4th suit?

 

 

 

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

 

 

 

[fromageGB]

Mike777 hit the problem on the head. When you are going to cue, you have to anticipate what you think partner might say and how you will accommodate it. In one regular partnership we have agreed that a serious cue bid is " one-under denial", where the one under trumps shows all controls, but needs partner to have undisclosed values, or in some circumstances might deny the lowest control.

[Cyberyeti]

Isn't this a 5 or 7 on a spade lead ?

 

We'd probably have bid 4♦ kickback directly over 3♣ then bid 6, avoiding pinpointing the lead.

[mcphee]

What is this 50% grand stuff, looks like 6 is 50% on a S lead to me, making it not so great at all. As all the opponents values are in S this is likely the lead to boot. That said these 6/4 hands can be awkward as you can not be sure partner holds the A of D and not a stiff. If I was going to continue cue bidding I prefer 4S to 4H. I have already bid H, shown a good hand via 4th suit, and now co-operated. If not using some other form of key card, 4N will basically force me into a slam I might prefer to avoid. The case with the hand we have here is just that. If partner can not bid more than 5C after 4S I will give up.

[Zelandakh]

A simple solution is to play the 4♣ bid as slam-try Minorwood. Then North will answer 4♠ showing 0 or 3 key cards and a good hand for slam (obviously 3) and South simply bids 6. Even if the 3 are ♣K, ♥A, ♦A and a spade is led, the slam is not toally hopeless. In your suggested solution, is 2♦ followed by 3♦ natural? Or a half-stopper ask? Or something else? It is probably not the sort of auction to try with a pick-up partner regardless. Not bidding this slam is hardly the end of the world either. It is looking positively rotten on a spade lead and ♣K by East.

 

Mike's solution is hardly a panacaea either. If North skips the diamond cue then is South really meant to go on with the ♣K instead of the ♦K? It is very easy to envisage partner having a diamond problem too. My own auction (2♣ - 2♦; 2♥ - 4♣; 4♠ - 6♣) basically exchanges even less information so is hardly a role-model of scientific accuracy. On Yu's problem hand, I would expect partner to have rebid 1NT but even if we are playing up-the-line a 2♥ call over 2♦ looks much more attractive than 3♣. If you play this as promising 3 card support and up-the-line, then I would still perpetrate a 2♠ call before venturing 3♣. It seems to break most rules of system design to allow an expensive call like 3♣ to be made on anything from 4234 to 4117 while consigning a cheaper call like 4♠ only to hands like 5116/5(02)6.

[Cyberyeti]

What is this 50% grand stuff, looks like 6 is 50% on a S lead to me, making it not so great at all. As all the opponents values are in S this is likely the lead to boot. That said these 6/4 hands can be awkward as you can not be sure partner holds the A of D and not a stiff. If I was going to continue cue bidding I prefer 4S to 4H. I have already bid H, shown a good hand via 4th suit, and now co-operated. If not using some other form of key card, 4N will basically force me into a slam I might prefer to avoid. The case with the hand we have here is just that. If partner can not bid more than 5C after 4S I will give up.

The grand and small are not that different in probability on a spade lead, so you almost might as well bid the grand. If the finesse works, the grand makes, if it doesn't, your extra chances in 6 are not great, I think I'd rather be in 7 than 6 if I can't bid it without suggesting a spade lead, of course 6 is a lot better on any other lead although 7 is still 50%.

[antonylee]

I think Yu is right, (in a pickup partnership) I should just bid 6♣ over 5♣ and hope partner does not have the only death hand (QJxx xx Q AKxxxx). I agree with bidding 7 at matchpoints; not that sure that I'd do so at IMPs (is the spade lead that clear? I don't know).

 

Now for another challenge: get to slam if South deals.

[Cyberyeti]

Now for another challenge: get to slam if South deals.

1♥-2♣ (not GF, 10+)

2N (GF not necessarily balanced)-3♣(5th one)

 

Now you can just blast it via kickback, or:

 

3♥(5th one)-3♠

4♣-4♥ (cue, 4♦ would ask aces)

4♠-4N (♦ cue)

5♦(cue, extras)-5N (no spade control or additional heart control, but more than I've shown)

6♣(we might be making 7 but can't be sure)

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Can you bid to 6♣ (or more, if you like 50% grands) on these hands?

[hv=pc=n&s=sa5hkqj86dkj3cqjt&n=st863hada7ca97654&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1hp1sp2dp3cp4cp4dp4hp5cppp]266|200[/hv]

 

North - South

1C

..... - 1H

1S ( 4s, longer Cl )

..... - 2D! ( 4th suit GF )

2NT ( stop in 4th suit, Diam, no 3h )

..... - 3C

3H ( cue )

..... - 3S ( cue )

4C ( Minorwood, since agreement was on the 3-level )

..... - 4H ( 2nd step = 1/4 )

4S ( next step = cQ-ask )

..... - 5D ( cQ + dK, no sK )

6C

[antonylee]

I dislike the 2NT response to 4SF -- that'll wrong-side 3NT with an awful frequency. Sure, if responder insists then opener should bid 3NT but if the Ds afre for example Ax opposite Qxx 3NT will be better from responder's side.