ATB

[broze]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj94hat86dqtcq85&w=sa73h7543d9842cj4&n=skt65hdakj7cak732&e=s82hkqj92d653ct96&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=ppp1cp1hp2sp3sp4cp4hp5hp5sppp]399|300[/hv]

 

2♠ game forcing, 4♣ probably non-serious, 4♥ Last Train

 

EDIT: It was not entirely clear what 5♥ was but we do nominally play voidwood.

Edited August 24, 2012 by broze

[ahydra]

Did you make a typo? Slams missing AK of trumps tend not to play well (unless in a 11-card fit :)).

 

edit: ah you updated the hand RIGHT as I posted. What is 5H?

 

ahydra

[broze]

Apologies, corrected. You're very speedy! :D

[CSGibson]

I think North is completely to blame, or the counter-intuitive system.

 

4♥ should not be last train, in my opinion, since there are 2 cue-bids available, and opener has claimed the other cue bid. 4♥ is clearly a cue bid in support of spades showing a heart control and denying a diamond control (or ace if you play aces first). If you have the agreement that this is always a first round control, and opener still wants to keycard, it is now possible to use 4N, "knowing" that partner has the A of hearts.

 

Similarly, you need better rules about when exclusion applies. 5♥ after a 4♥ cue is not exclusion in any partnership I know of. I think its exact meaning again depends on your cue-bidding style.

 

As for getting to slam, that's harder - it depends on knowing who has the J of spades. I think north has to make a leap of faith when partner cues the heart, knowing that partner might not cooperate with 4 trumps to the Q and out. It helps that N has the ♠ T, so that this will have play regardless of the ♠ jack.

[ArtK78]

I hate the 5♥ call. South assumed that the partnership did not have first round control of diamonds or second round control of clubs, so he signed off.

 

It is far from clear how to get to this slam with reasonable assurance. It may be a matter of North just committing to slam by continuing to cue bid. It is certainly possible that the trump suit might be inadequate. South might hold:

 

xxxx

AKQJx

Qx

Qx

 

North could just bid 5♠ over 3♠ to focus on the quality of the spade suit, but it is not clear that South should move forward missing the A and K of spades. However, from South's perspective, if North were to jump to 5♠, slam would only be wrong if North were missing both of the top spade honors. Would North really have rebid 2♠ on 10xxx(x)? That seems extremely unlikely.

[aguahombre]

IMO, serious /non-serious should not be used by the jump-shifter here. It should only apply in a game-forcing auction where the one who employs it has not yet shown extra values for his/her opening or response.

 

A pattern continuation of 4D/3S would work well:

 

1C-1H

2s-3S

4D-4H

5C- would certainly get the message across to South about the value of his QJ in trumps and minor suit queens. South could then make sure six spades was reached. If North intended 5H as voidwood he shouldn't have done it; his hand is not prepared to take over.

[Cyberyeti]

This is so much easier if you just rebid 1♠ on what is a potential misfit.

 

I'm presuming 3♠ shows more than 4♠ here, what's the point of cueing 4♣, what do you want to hear ? bid 5♠ which looks very Axxx/Kxxx and everything else.

[broze]

4♥ should not be last train, in my opinion, since there are 2 cue-bids available, and opener has claimed the other cue bid. 4♥ is clearly a cue bid in support of spades showing a heart control and denying a diamond control.

 

Similarly, you need better rules about when exclusion applies. 5♥ after a 4♥ cue is not exclusion in any partnership I know of. I think its exact meaning again depends on your cue-bidding style.

 

I think I bid 4♥ calling it last train imagining that it would both deny a ♦ cue and confirm a ♥ cue because with neither as South I would just sign off. I suppose you're right - that's not really anything to do with LTTC. As for the 5♥ bid my partner has since pointed out that it might show a ♥ void but not necessarily be exclusion. Then knowing his shape I could locate his points and bid the slam. Useful treatment?

 

South might hold:

 

xxxx

AKQJx

Qx

Qx

 

North could just bid 5♠ over 3♠ to focus on the quality of the spade suit, but it is not clear that South should move forward missing the A and K of spades.

 

South cannot hold this as he is a passed hand, but I take your point. As for 5♠ over 3, my understanding was that this asked for a control in the unbid suit. Is that not correct? I know some play it as asking for trump quality. Is that the more common/only treatment?

 

IMO, serious /non-serious should not be used by the jump-shifter here....

 

A pattern continuation of 4D/3S would work well:

 

1C-1H

2s-3S

4D-4H

5C-

 

In this case what exactly can a 3NT bid mean over 3♠? Choice of game looks very ugly. And does anyone really play pattern continuations in this auction. I would never consider any other bid over 3♠ as anything but a cue.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

"Patterning out" could be achieved at the 3-level ( not available after 3S over the 2S-jump ).

Although I don't disagree with the 2S-jump, I agree with Cyberyeti that the auction becomes a "tad" easier without it ( it's still not easy ) :

..... p

1C - 1H

1S - 2S

3D - 3NT

4C ( cue ) - 4D ( allowed to cue any of the top 3 honors in partner's bid suit )

5D ( cue ) - 5H ( should be the Ace at this level especially after partner has shown shortness )

6S ( CSGibson's "leap of faith " )

[mike777]

34% south...south can open and north will never stop short of slam.

66% north...north might rebid 1s not 2s, that gives you more room, in any event 5h was not best on actual auction.

[ggwhiz]

Tough to assess blame since I would have reversed into 2♦ with the north hand. An attempt to save room that would have buried us but maybe get to 6♣.

 

On the actual auction I would think that 3♠ is stronger than 4 and north is closer to a gsf 5nt bid than a pass of 5♠. I would just punt 6.

[kenrexford]

It is impossible to assign blame without completely knowing the agreements. However, I will try nonetheless, making some assumptions.

 

1. 4♣ was defined as "probably non-serious." I will assume that it really is non-serious. This might, as some suggested, seem implausible because Opener is known to have a big hand. However, context defines serious vs. non-serious. My thinking in this type of situation is that "serious vs. non-serious" refers to some feature that cannot be shown by cuebidding. In this sequence, the obvious candidate is trump quality. Hence, for me 4♣ would deny good trumps, whereas 3NT would state, "cuebid please, and do not worry too much about trumps." As you can see, that would help here.

2. Obviously, that first point of mine was not the agreement, because North has good trumps. The second reason to use serious vs. non-serious, however, is to define 4♥ as either a true cue or a Last Train cue. 3NT would have purified 4♥ as a true cue, whereas 4♣ makes 4♥ more quantitative. If the intent of North was to find out about North's strength (good 3♠ or bad 3♠), then 4♣ as a non-serious, LTTC-enabling cue makes sense. With North knowing that South cannot make a useful cue here, 4♣ for that purpose makes a lot of sense. So, I kind of like 4♣ if that was the thinking and reason.

3. See above as to what 4♥ means or should mean. If 4♥ was, as I play, LTTC (because 4♣ made it so), then this is a perfect start to the auction. South is allowed to stated that he has good contextual stuff, stuff that he could not show effectively as "true cues."

4. Now to 5♥. If the rule is Exclusion, then it is Exclusion, period. You cannot make cuebids when the calls show Exclusion by agreement. Exclusion 5♥ in the context of partner showing "stuff 3♠ plus more stuff 4♥" seems imminently reasonable. If 5♥ would be lackwood, you might mention that possibility, but then that would be dumb with a void.

5. 5♠ seems like the right answer to Exclusion 5♥, because South has no key cards.

6. Passing 5♠ seems weird. You asked if partner had extras, and he said yes by bidding 4♥. Now, you back off? If that answer means stopping entirely (planning to bid 6♠ if the Ace, 7♠ if the Ace and Queen, but pass if no Ace?), then I think 5♥ was wrong for that reason. Probably best (as others have suggested) to bid 5♠.

7. As an aside, possibly relevant, 5♦ by Opener cannot be Exclusion, no matter what the agreements. You do not use Exclusion when partner already denied a control in that suit. My default would be to have 5♦ as Exclusion with a void in hearts (to save space), but whatever you like works. If you do not do that, 5♦ means something other than Exclusion (with me 5♥ would mean something other than Exclusion). In this sequence, it might make sense to have one be Exclusion without the trump Queen, the other with. That way, there is a solution for the chicken. With the North hand, bid Exclusion without the trump Queen; Responder is expected to bid slam if he has the hand where his answer would be 5♠ but he has the Queen. That at least helps.

8. The issue seems to be the spade Jack. Maybe in theory the best treatment for what I described above is to bid one call as Exclusion needing, and to accept with the Queen AND Jack? A tad rich theoretically for today...

[lalldonn]

I mostly blame south even though I don't like the 5♥ bid at all. North doesn't have a slam force IMO, but he kept cuebidding and trying for slam even to the 5 level until south gave up, so it's hard for me to blame him in that sense. The only encouragement south offered was one cuebid then a signoff. I think after north forced to the 5 level south should surely bid slam even if he isn't sure what north is up to (as I wouldn't be since I can't think of a hand that bids 5♥). He knows north has to have a diamond control since south skipped diamonds and north kept going, and south should figure north for good trumps IMO since I don't believe he should have the AK AK in the minors he actually held when he bypassed 5 of both. Maybe AKTx - Kxx AKxxxx or something would make a little sense though I still wouldn't bid 5♥ with that.

 

So I fault north for making a confusing and space-wasting bid but south more since I think he should have bid slam regardless.

[mfa1010]

I agree with donn but would have spiced up the criticism of south a lot. I don't know what more he thought he needed to bid slam even if he did not know exactly what p meant with 5♥. 2♠ already showed a powerhouse and partner just kept trying for slam all the way to the 5-level.

[han]

Agree with the above two. Basically north bid a lot and south bid very little, while south had very good cards.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Agree with the above two. Basically north bid a lot and south bid very little, while south had very good cards.

The only other auction I can think of after the 2S-jump and Opener's "pushiness" includes a 5-level ♦-cue :

 

........ p

1C - 1H

2S - 3S

4C - 4H

5D - 6S

[aguahombre]

I'm presuming 3♠ shows more than 4♠ here

Maybe, but I was presuming 3♠ simply shows four card spade support, leaving room in case ---

 

In this case what exactly can a 3NT bid mean over 3♠?

What if opener had, say, AKX X AX AKXXXXX (not a 2C opener as defined for us). 3NT would be the only way to knock off spades and show the long clubs hand, since any 4-level bid would confirm spades as trump. Subject to discussion, of course; but I can't find a rebid for opener after a 1♥ response other than 2S unless 2NT is a gadget or some other toy is available.

[han]

Alert, 14 cards.

[aguahombre]

Hmm. 3+1+2+7=14. I never did figure out the new math.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Hmm. 3+1+2+7=14. I never did figure out the new math.

 

Which is easier to read ( and count ):

 

AKXXXXX

 

A K X X X X X

 

A K x x x x x

[lalldonn]

What if opener had, say, AKX X AX AKXXXXX (not a 2C opener as defined for us). 3NT would be the only way to knock off spades and show the long clubs hand, since any 4-level bid would confirm spades as trump. Subject to discussion, of course; but I can't find a rebid for opener after a 1♥ response other than 2S unless 2NT is a gadget or some other toy is available.

I would rebid 2♦ with that. I know that sickens some people (and it's part of why I play precision after all) but my next choice would be to rebid 3NT. I would never bid a three card spade suit since I want the major to guarantee four if we can still have a fit. The only time I violate that is 1m 1S 2H which I bid regularly with 33(61) where if partner raises to 3H I specifically define 3S as setting trumps since we must have a spade fit. But I think it's very important that the "lies" are told in minors not majors.

[cherdano]

We need a template to reply

_ North

X South

needs to reread "Why you lose at bridge"

[CSGibson]

By the way, I am completely convinced now that South should bid slam in this sequence, even though I hate N's 5♥. The arguments have been very convincing.