Missed slam ATB

[Stephen Tu]

Matchpoints

[hv=pc=n&w=s6hakqj73d9853cq7&e=sat3h65daq2cakj52&d=e&a=1C2S4HP4SP5HPPP]300|225[/hv]

 

Which bids should be changed? Does anyone reach 7, or 6nt?

 

What should be the difference between 4h and bidding 3h planning on bidding more hearts later?

[ahydra]

On the actual bidding, 5H is wimpish. With a trump suit that good you almost don't care if partner puts down a singleton. West should bid keycard.

 

4H is a fit jump in my system - because 3H is definitely forcing. Even if 4H isn't conventional, it should be more "bucketload of hearts" e.g. x AQxxxxx Kxx xx than a good hand like this.

 

So 1C-(2S)-3H and now East should sense slam possibilities but have no idea where to start, so goes 3S, Wast follows up with 4H, East keycards and we end up in 6NT. Getting that 6th heart across is difficult :(

 

What if West tries the interesting shot of 4C after 3S, to find out about the quality of East's clubs? Then 4D-4NT-5C (1 or 4)-5NT-6C (0 kings)... ugh. Looks like West has to push the boat out even further and try 6S as a grand-slam try. Who knows what that would be interpreted as though!

 

ahydra

[lalldonn]

Missing east's 13th card.

 

The difference between 4♥ directly or 3 then 4 is the direct one shows more like a 4♥ opening, longer hearts and a weaker hand than this one. On this hand it was not a good bid.

[kenrexford]

This is so amazingly easy. Once West decides to jump to 4♥ (whether right or wrong) and East bids 4♠, West has about the easiest 5♣ call I can imagine, if he is timid. Now, East siumply bids 5NT (a strange place where I would use GSF), and the grand is bid easily.

[Stephen Tu]

Sorry missed putting in Easts lowest diamond, fixed. Ken, doesn't GSF get you to 7 with only 2 of the top 3 honors?

[ggwhiz]

100% West. 4♥ was ill advised, what's the hurry? I would bid that on KQJ 7th and out.

 

5♥ over the cue with a fitting club card is just not paying attention to pards bidding.

[kenrexford]

Sorry missed putting in Easts lowest diamond, fixed. Ken, doesn't GSF get you to 7 with only 2 of the top 3 honors?

 

I guess that's a problem if you play GSF that way. But, when partner has already shown slam interest in this type of an auction, I would assume common sense takes over. Thus, bid 7♥ with all three, 6♥ with 0 or 1, and 6♣ with 2. In other words, Josephine, but bumped up one because of the context.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I guess that's a problem if you play GSF that way. But, when partner has already shown slam interest in this type of an auction, I would assume common sense takes over. Thus, bid 7♥ with all three, 6♥ with 0 or 1, and 6♣ with 2. In other words, Josephine, but bumped up one because of the context.

When ♥ are trump, 5S can be used as the GSF ... and in the recent thread, Zel's scheme ( post # 9 in that thread ) would prove beneficial:

 

thread

 

4H - 4S

5C - 5S!

??

..5NT = any 1 (6♣ asks which)

..6♣ = 2 including the Q (6♦ asks)

..6♦ = AK

..6♥ = none

..higher bids = AKQ + side feature ( 7♣ here )

[Cyberyeti]

I would bid 3♥ as 4♥ would show clubs as well, but then my 1♣ shows 4.

 

I'd expect:

 

1♣-(2♠)-3♥

3♠-4♥

4♠(KC)-5♥

5N(anything else)-6♣

7♥

[lalldonn]

I would never assume a jump to game is a fit jump. In fact I think fit showing jumps are explictely jumps below game, and to play otherwise is a weird agreement.

[Phil]

I hate rules.

 

And I really hate proselytizing rules that I've developed myself. Yet,

 

"When you have AK of trump and partner makes a slam try, you should probably cooperate. When you have AKQ of trump you should definitely cooperate".

 

- Clayton's "Rule of Cooperation"

[Phil]

Oh, and I hate 4♥. Can I give West 200%?

[SteveMoe]

I have to rethink my vote (100% West).

 

Since 3♥ is forcing and conserves space it's easy to consider 4♥ a mistake. However 4♥ should show a self-sufficient suit (6+ in an opening hand IMHO) - we don't preempt preempts, right? West cannot know the value of the ♣Q, and finding it requires West to have the foresight to answer 5♣ - should West know to do that?

 

I think no. Of the 2 outside features in West's hand, the ♣Q is risky to cue as partner might be looking for the A or K, and the spade singleton commits our side to slam - a decision West cannot make.

 

I would not fault West if they chose to bid 4N over 4♠, but that also wrong-sides captaincy. (After a putative 5♣ East should count to 13 tricks. If East suspects a singleton or void in ♣ they might settle in ♥ instead of NT. But this is 20-20 hindsight, not good bidding).

 

I think East is too good to pass 5♥ - the real reason I "change" my vote. East should know EW have an 8+ card ♥ fit and should bid 6♦ completing the Ace scan, committing the side to Small Slam in ♥ and guiding East to realize the value of the ♣Q. Queens are often the difference between 6 and 7.

 

100% to East please!

[kenrexford]

I have to rethink my vote (100% West).

 

Since 3♥ is forcing and conserves space it's easy to consider 4♥ a mistake. However 4♥ should show a self-sufficient suit (6+ in an opening hand IMHO) - we don't preempt preempts, right? West cannot know the value of the ♣Q, and finding it requires West to have the foresight to answer 5♣ - should West know to do that?

 

I think no. Of the 2 outside features in West's hand, the ♣Q is risky to cue as partner might be looking for the A or K, and the spade singleton commits our side to slam - a decision West cannot make.

 

I would not fault West if they chose to bid 4N over 4♠, but that also wrong-sides captaincy. (After a putative 5♣ East should count to 13 tricks. If East suspects a singleton or void in ♣ they might settle in ♥ instead of NT. But this is 20-20 hindsight, not good bidding).

 

I think East is too good to pass 5♥ - the real reason I "change" my vote. East should know EW have an 8+ card ♥ fit and should bid 6♦ completing the Ace scan, committing the side to Small Slam in ♥ and guiding East to realize the value of the ♣Q. Queens are often the difference between 6 and 7.

 

100% to East please!

Is there a place to nominate worst analysis of the year?

[SteveMoe]

Is there a place to nominate worst analysis of the year?

So I assume holding ♠AK10 ♥65 ♦AQ2 ♣AJ532 you would not get to 7NT after hearing partner bid 5♣ over your 4♠ control bid? Enlighten me!

 

As for analysis, it's more an interpretation. With weak hearts and a desire to play in 4, I can always double first. Over a preempt we don't play WJS.

[kenrexford]

So I assume holding ♠AK10 ♥65 ♦AQ2 ♣AJ532 you would not get to 7NT after hearing partner bid 5♣ over your 4♠ control bid? Enlighten me!

 

As for analysis, it's more an interpretation. With weak hearts and a desire to play in 4, I can always double first. Over a preempt we don't play WJS.

That is correct. I would not bid 7NT next. I generally do not expect partners to jump to 4H with something like eight solid hearts and the King of my suit. XX-AKQxxxxx-x-Kx seems a tad rich.

[the hog]

I blame west 100%. 4H was an extremely poor bid. 3H is forcing, why not bid that?

[Cyberyeti]

I would never assume a jump to game is a fit jump. In fact I think fit showing jumps are explictely jumps below game, and to play otherwise is a weird agreement.

We just have a blanket agreement that 4♥ in this type of auction is not just hearts. Actually 4♥ might be voidwood in this auction, but the one thing I know is that it's not just hearts.

 

Either use IMO is better than a big heart suit, particularly if opps bid more spades.

[Finch]

I would never assume a jump to game is a fit jump. In fact I think fit showing jumps are explictely jumps below game, and to play otherwise is a weird agreement.

 

 

We just have a blanket agreement that 4♥ in this type of auction is not just hearts. Actually 4♥ might be voidwood in this auction, but the one thing I know is that it's not just hearts.Either use IMO is better than a big heart suit, particularly if opps bid more spades.

 

There are three good reasons why 4H is just hearts.

 

The first is that you don't seem to know if it shows hearts & clubs or is voidwood for clubs. If you are going to play it as conventional, you and partner should at least agree what the convention shows.

The second is the least important, which is that playing jumps to game as not natural is, as Burn puts it, COBD*. But I play in a partnership with lots of such bids, so that can be overcome too.

 

The final reason is that 4H is a hugely descriptive bid, particularly if opps bid more spades. If you have a normal 4H bid, say, xx KQJ10xxx Qxx x and you bid 4H, the next hand bids 4S, and partner doubles you know it's right to pass. If you bid 3H, natural and forcing and it continues 4S x you don't know what to do, because you have so much less defence than partner might expect. If you double (planning to bid 4H next) and partner doubles 4S you are pretty much forced to bid. It's all about describing your hand accurately and quickly.

 

*Capable Of Being Disremembered

[SteveMoe]

That is correct. I would not bid 7NT next. I generally do not expect partners to jump to 4H with something like eight solid hearts and the King of my suit. XX-AKQxxxxx-x-Kx seems a tad rich.

cf Frances's reply.

Holding XX-AKQxxxxx-x-Kx 3♥ comes to mind, intending to jump to 5...

 

Holding xxx AKQxxx xx Kx I certainly think 4♥ is an apt description. With weaker hearts, we can start with double or 3 ♥ I think xxx AQxxx Kx Kx is a perfect 3♥ bid - some might even find it a touch rich! We want 4♥ to show a self-sufficient suit.

[kenrexford]

cf Frances's reply.

Holding XX-AKQxxxxx-x-Kx 3♥ comes to mind, intending to jump to 5...

 

Holding xxx AKQxxx xx Kx I certainly think 4♥ is an apt description. With weaker hearts, we can start with double or 3 ♥ I think xxx AQxxx Kx Kx is a perfect 3♥ bid - some might even find it a touch rich! We want 4♥ to show a self-sufficient suit.

So, in order to find a grand slam that needs a 3-2 split in trumps and either clubs splitting 3-3 or 4-2 with the Queen doubleton or a diamond finesse, all assuming that you also catch partner with solid trumps, you are willing to force West to not show an obviously important club Queen, even if he also has solid trumps? Besides, if opener needs that King and not simply the Queen, he has the option of more cuebidding anyway, if your proposed holding is even possible.

 

I want to vote this as worst analysis ever even more.

[lalldonn]

I mean, Ken should at least be nicer. It was very creative of someone to find a way to not blame west at all. I don't know if I could have done it even if my post was intended as a spoof.

[SteveMoe]

The final reason is that 4H is a hugely descriptive bid, particularly if opps bid more spades. If you have a normal 4H bid, say, xx KQJ10xxx Qxx x and you bid 4H, the next hand bids 4S, and partner doubles you know it's right to pass. If you bid 3H, natural and forcing and it continues 4S x you don't know what to do, because you have so much less defence than partner might expect. If you double (planning to bid 4H next) and partner doubles 4S you are pretty much forced to bid. It's all about describing your hand accurately and quickly.

 

Frances, I found (serendipity) corroboration from an interesting source. Thought you'd like to see the quote:

 

ACBL Bridge Bulletin October 2012 p 53.

My Bridge and Yours - by Frank Stewart

<last paragraph>

"As an aside, I liked my partner's jump to 4♦, which started us on an easy road to slam. Many players would have "saved space" with 3♦, but for slam bidding, one descriptive jump is more effective than several delicate minimum forcing bids -- so wrote the great theorist Edgar Kaplan."

[SteveMoe]

if your proposed holding is even possible.

 

I want to vote this as worst analysis ever even more.

The gist here is that West has a perfectly natural description of a solid suit worth game opposite partner's putative balanced weak NT opener (12-14). The cue bid of the ♣ queen is certainly creative but not without risk. (I have used this tactic before).

 

Bridge bidding is about communication. I am simply pointing out that a rational explanation exists in a natural dialect that can avoid certain risks.

[SteveMoe]

So, in order to find a grand slam that needs a 3-2 split in trumps and either clubs splitting 3-3 or 4-2 with the Queen doubleton or a diamond finesse, all assuming that you also catch partner with solid trumps, you are willing to force West to not show an obviously important club Queen, even if he also has solid trumps? Besides, if opener needs that King and not simply the Queen, he has the option of more cuebidding anyway, if your proposed holding is even possible.

 

I want to vote this as worst analysis ever even more.

West bid plausibly under natural methods.

 

What you seem to ignore is that with 4♥ showing 6+ and at most one loser in the suit, East knows slam is likely with no further information.

 

The 5♣ cue bid you propose showing the Queen is not essential to get to 6♥. If West doesn't have the ♥A, then there are cover cards available for the side suits. So a viewpoint that West has bid well within a known paradigm exists. It's East that should have done more. 6♦ on the way to 6♥ is a strong invitation to 7 with useful cover cards. West should expect the ♣Q is valuable, that partner has AKxxx in Clubs, and should bid 7♥ or NT. East can always correct to 7N.

 

If you expect partner to jump to 4♥ on length only and garbage, then I can understand your viewpoint, but then the ♣ cue bid becomes even more risky...and you have no mechanism to show a really good ♥ suit.