Wow! are we using cards from the same deck?

[PhilKing]

It finds the right level if you intend to play in NT. This might be a good spot to state that my question is honest, it's not a form of saying "5NT wtp".

 

What's wrong with it is that you can make about 14 or 15 tricks opposite a dead minimum with the right honour structure. Whether partner is max or min is not particularly relevant (although grand will clearly be laydown if partner accepts).

 

It's just a hand for setting hearts asking for key cards (various methods are available). As Manudude pointed out, as long as partner has the heart ace, you can just bid grand - there is almost no way you do not have 13 tricks.

[ArtK78]

I expected it to be a boring, flat board too but it turned into a 5.5/8

So that means the board was played 9 times, and 3 pairs failed to bid 7NT. That is about what I would expect.

 

Look at the discussion in this thread. Several posters did something other than ask for the missing ace and bid 7NT if partner had it. Is it any wonder that 3 random club level pairs failed to bid 7NT?

[billw55]

So that means the board was played 9 times, and 3 pairs failed to bid 7NT. That is about what I would expect.

 

Look at the discussion in this thread. Several posters did something other than ask for the missing ace and bid 7NT if partner had it. Is it any wonder that 3 random club level pairs failed to bid 7NT?

At a club game, I am impressed so many did bid it.

[jillybean]

At a club game, I am impressed so many did bid it.

The hand is from one of the better club games, mostly very experienced "A" players and a couple of pro's.

I thought it would be a completely flat board and was surprised when 3 pairs missed it.

 

Our auction was 1N 2D 2H 4S* 4N 7N but I was very tempted just to put the 7N card down.

[Antrax]

So 4♠ is kickback for hearts? How do you bid if responder has only five hearts?

[neilkaz]

The hand is from one of the better club games, mostly very experienced "A" players and a couple of pro's.

I thought it would be a completely flat board and was surprised when 3 pairs missed it.

 

Our auction was 1N 2D 2H 4S* 4N 7N but I was very tempted just to put the 7N card down.

 

As for the three pairs that missed it, did they play 7♥ instead or did some miss the grand entirely?

 

I remain shocked at how often even "good" players butcher very strong hands. It is absolutely trivial to either Gerber or transfer then key card and after finding one ace, if not sure of the grand, you'll find three kings when you ask for them and even the cat sitting on my desk can count 14 tricks and knows to bid 7NT. Good that you didn't yield to temptation and blast 7NT since PD who could have 14 hcp could be missing the ace. There are no bonuses for blasting or guessing when you might have 13 easy safe tricks when standard trivial methods allow you to make sure. (Off course in MBC, some self rated advanced yahoo would blast to 6♥ here, struggle thru 2 minutes of their slow declarer play, and get a vwdp :) from pd after taking 13 tricks).

 

Please allow me to ask a few questions about your methods after opening NT. Your kick back response is obviously 1430?

 

OK so you play Jacoby Transfer to ♥ and then 4♠ is kickback. I presume Jacoby then 4NT is quant with 5♥ as is standard. I also presume you play Texas. What is Texas then 4♠? Exclusion? What about Texas then 4NT (standard when not playing kickback is RKC).

 

But if transfering to ♠ then if Jacoby then 4NT is kickback, you lose the ability to transfer and then bid a quant 4NT with 5 ♠ to offer opener a choice. What are your methods after transfering to ♠? I presume they must be very similar to those after transfering to ♥ since it could be easy to forget or confuse.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[TWO4BRIDGE]

What is Texas then 4♠? Exclusion? What about Texas then 4NT (standard when not playing kickback is RKC)?

.. neilkaz ..

 

1NT - 4D!

4H - ??

....... 4S! = kickback-RKC

....... 4NT = Voidwood ( excluding ♠A ) a la Meckwell

....... 5C = Voidwood ( excluding ♣A )

....... 5D = Voidwood ( excluding ♦A )

 

1NT - 2D!

2H - ??

....... 4NT = Quant

....... 4S = ?? ( I don't know what this is ?? )

[jillybean]

Hi Neil,

 

Yes, we play 1430 kickback.

I could have, (should have?) bid texas then 4♠ kickback. Transfer/texas then 4N is Q

I have read on bbf about all the various sequences available using jacoby, texas, kickback but we have not defined them all. These auctions come up so infrequently I'm not sure that I want to spend the time or if I have spare memory cells available. :) I have other sequences that I forget and are probably more important to work on.

 

As for the pairs that did not get to 7N - 2 were in 6 or 7 hearts, 1 didn't get to slam (710)

[Cascade]

The hand is from one of the better club games, mostly very experienced "A" players and a couple of pro's.

I thought it would be a completely flat board and was surprised when 3 pairs missed it.

 

Our auction was 1N 2D 2H 4S* 4N 7N but I was very tempted just to put the 7N card down.

 

Do you play Gerber?

 

If so I think

 

1NT 4♣

4♥ 7NT

 

seems to be about as sophisticated as you need.

[Vampyr]

I have other sequences that I forget and are probably more important to work on.

 

No one should have sequences that they forget. You may be playing too many conventions.

 

You might want to try to get rid of 80% of them and see, after a few months, if you miss any.

[jillybean]

Do you play Gerber?

 

Yes! This is one of the sequences I often forget to use.

I thought that we would be playing in some number of hearts or NT which is why I started with the transfer.

 

I bid and made 7N and still have things to learn from the hand, which is why I love this game!

[Cascade]

Do you play Gerber?

 

If so I think

 

1NT 4♣

4♥ 7NT

 

seems to be about as sophisticated as you need.

 

In a double dummy simulation, yes I know double dummy, there were 13 tricks in no trumps 986/1000 hands. This is why inviting a grand is poor. I suppose I should have compared with how many times 7♥ made. I might do this when i get home.

[jillybean]

Away at another tournament Wayne? :)

[ArtK78]

Do you play Gerber?

 

If so I think

 

1NT 4♣

4♥ 7NT

 

seems to be about as sophisticated as you need.

I thought that this was the consensus answer on this hand from the very first response. Ask for aces - if you have them all, bid 7NT; otherwise, bid 6NT.

 

That is why billw summed up this thread accurately as follows:

 

Cool story. Boring bridge problem. ;)

[Cascade]

I thought that this was the consensus answer on this hand from the very first response. Ask for aces - if you have them all, bid 7NT; otherwise, bid 6NT.

 

That is why billw summed up this thread accurately as follows:

 

Sorry I must have skipped over some of the posts. Must have been a bad day I also skipped over the 14-17. Never to mind even opposite 14-15 the grand was 975/1000 in the simulation. And as I suggested earlier I looked at 7♥ and that was more likely to fail than 7NT presumably most often if not always on an adverse ruff.

[gszes]

Before we trot out a convention (lets say 1n 5n asking p to bid

6 with a min or 7 near the top) we need to make sure it is the

right time to use that particular covnention. Here we will make 7N

if p has as little as spade K heart A and a minor K and this means p

will stop in 6 with a whole ton of hands including the above cards

and anything resembling a minimum. Once you look at the problem

this way you will see that 5n quant is not the way to go because

there are far too many instances where the grand will not be reached.

 

Since it is reasonable to be missing an ace (we have btn 34-37 hcp),

bidding 1n 7n seems irresponsible since making 7 will probably be

impossible missing the heart A.

 

 

IMO this hand is best handled using a simple A/K asking sequence

(any of them will do as long as it asks for aces then kings in some way

shape or form). The reason this works is that when we ask for aces

and p shows one and then ask for kings---opener will be able to leap to

7n with a surprise source of tricks (ie KQJx in either minor). If p has

only 1 K (and no surprise source of tricks) 7 is probably a poor idea

anyway at best on a finesse or a squeeze. If p has 2 kings 7 should be

impossible to stop.

 

Now how do we ask for aces after a 1n opening.

 

Gerber if agreed is the easiest.

Blackwood is possible but care must be taken to ensure p will not interperet

your ace asking bid with quantitative. Those of you that play Texas Transfers

have the easiest method. 1N Texas followed by 4n is your favorite form of

Blackwood while 1N Jacoby followed by 4n is quantitative.

[Zelandakh]

When I learned to play bridge, admittedly from Culbertson, 1NT - 4NT and 1NT - 5NT were both quantitative invites. But here with a 7 card self-supporting suit it seems like a silly approach to take. Instead I cannot see why we do not just invite partner to cue bid. In UK Standard, one could simply reply 3♥ and then we can ask for key cards and kings after hearing a control bid or two. My own variation on that would be to use the multi-way 2♠ after a transfer:

 

1NT - 2♦

2♥

... - 2♠ = range ask or clubs or strong one-suiter

2N = min

... - 3♥ = strong 1-suiter

4♥ = serious (for a minimum), controls in all side suits

... - 4♠ = RKCB

4N = 1 or 4 key cards

... - 7N

 

If you do not think Opener should accept the slam try then

 

... -

3♠ = non-serious

... - 3N = spade asking bid

4♠ = controls in all side suits, 1 key card

... -

reaches the same point.

 

On the other hand, perhaps I should just Texas and key card like everyone else. :P

 

 

In other news, Don, one possibility is to play 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 4♠ as Baron with a 5♥440 hand, although most can probably handle this another way. Another would be to play it as Voidwood, thus freeing up 1NT - 4♦; 4♥ - 4NT to be Voidwood excluding the ♦A...but only if you can manage not to forget!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Partner's hand?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saq5hkqjt932da5ca&n=skj86ha65dk2ckj73&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1n]266|200[/hv]

 

Beautiful!

EDIT : I mistakenly had the 3D! and 3H! reversed... corrected now .

Zel.... this is what I came up with awhile back to deal with Responder holding a GF LONG Major:

 

1NT - 2D!

2H - 3C! ( either real 2nd suit, 4+♣ OR Long ♥ only )

??

.. 3D! = 1st step, agrees ♣ ( 4 or 5 cards ♣ )

.. 3H! = 2nd step, agrees Major ( ♥ here )

.. 3S! = 3rd step, agrees BOTH

..3NT! = agrees Neither

after:

3S! - ??

......... 3NT! = long ♥ hand, start cuebidding

.......... 4C! = 2-suiter w/real ♣-suit, need cuebids

.......... 4D! = 6 Ace RKC

after:

.... - 3NT! ( ♥ )

4C - 4S! ( kickback-RKC )

5C ( 1/4 ) - 5S! ( specific K-ask )

5NT ( ♠ K ) - 7NT ( no need to make a 2nd K-ask )

[Zelandakh]

I use 3♣ as a comparable 2-way after a 2♥ transfer but the follow-ups I have settled on are slightly different:

 

1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♣ = diamonds or strong one-suiter

==

3♦ = 2 spades, 4+ diamonds

3♥ = 2 spades, <4 diamonds

3♠ = 3+ spades, <4 diamonds (spades agreed)

others = 3+ spades, 4+ diamonds (spades agreed)

 

The problem with 3♦ agreeing the major is that when partner bids 3NT and you hold the one-suiter, you have effectively preempted yourself from getting in the control bids you took this route for. There is a similar problem over your 3♥ too, albeit less acute. When you use 3♣ in combination with hearts, there is no easy solution to this since you only have one bid below 3♥ but 2 hand types without a heart fit. One solution might be for 3♦ (over 3♣) to show any hand wthout spade fit, then 3♥ is the one-suiter and 3♠ shows clubs. That obviously gives you much less space in club-fit auctions than using 2♠ for this though.

 

Out of interest, what do you need 2♠ for after a heart transfer? I cover the 5♥4♠ invite hands with 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2NT; the 5♥5♠ GF hands with (inter alia) 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 3♦ and the 5♥5♠ invite hands with 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♥. I know some folks use it to cover a range of invitational hands and that is certainly a reasonable approach. It seems like a waste of an important sequence to make it non-forcing though.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zel:

 

I use 3D as the natural 2-suiter w/♦ ( no "multi" meaning as with 3C ) :

 

1NT - 2transfer

2M - 3D

 

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

Also, note to the correction in my previous post # 43 .

 

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

Also, you have a valid concern of the 3NT = agreeing neither when responder has the long ♥ hand. Possibly could be solved with another "multi" ??

 

1NT - 2transf

2M - 3C!

3D! = either agree ♣ or agree neither