how to bid this slam

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Which leaves Ken's view and question unanswered ( Kenberg's post # 20 ). Do you have the necessary continuations after 3C to get to 6♣, or would natural have been better for you?

Clubs get no respect. Notice the numerous conventions that sacrifices a 2C or 3C bid as artificial.

 

Playing the Wolff Relay, which always uses 3C! as the "ask" after opener's 2NT-jump rebid, leaves Responder's 3D as natural, GF which made ♦ slam exploration feasible for OP's deal.

 

Responder shows ♣ by way of NT rebids after the Wolff 3C! artificial ask:

 

1C - 1H

2NT - 3C! = always asks for 4 cards ♥

3D = no 4 cards ♥

..... - ??

......... 3H = bare minimum for pass ( the Wolff Sign-off portion of the Relay )

......... 3S = GF, 5+h/4s, 7+hcp unbalanced

.........3NT = 4 card ♣ support, 10-12 hcp

.........4NT = 5+ card ♣ support, 13-14 hcp, slammish [ EDIT: I think 4C ( not 4NT ) would be better to show this... and make it Minorwood too ] .

 

Using the "NT" method to show ♣ support leaves little or no room for slam exploration or key card ask ( at Minorwood or Kickback level ) ..

Edited January 3, 2013 by TWO4BRIDGE

[aguahombre]

Playing the Wolff Relay, which always uses 3C! as the "ask" after opener's 2NT-jump rebid, leaves Responder's 3D as natural, GF which made ♦ slam exploration feasible for OP's deal.

 

Responder shows ♣ by way of NT rebids after the Wolff 3C! artificial ask:

 

1C - 1H

2NT - 3C! = always asks for 4 cards ♥

Interesting. I would have thought opener might have raised hearts with 4 hearts.

[Fluffy]

Which leaves Ken's view and question unanswered. Do you have the necessary continuations after 3C to get to 6♣, or would natural have been better for you?

 

Do you mean 6♣ on a 4-2 fit? I don't think its a great contract.

 

After a meaningful 1m opening and an enquiry in the majors you normally have a very good idea of how many clubs partner has, so you can bid 4♣ natural next if you want. Partner also knows how many clubs he has in context so he can sing off in 4NT with too few.

[Cyberyeti]

Do you mean 6♣ on a 4-2 fit? I don't think its a great contract.

 

After a meaningful 1m opening and an enquiry in the majors you normally have a very good idea of how many clubs partner has, so you can bid 4♣ natural next if you want. Partner also knows how many clubs he has in context so he can sing off in 4NT with too few.

They're talking about the same hand with the minors reversed as to whether you can get to 6♣ if you play artificial rebids over 1x-1y-2N I think

[Fluffy]

I see, well, after south shows 32 majors (maybe 2-2) bidding 3NT after the 3♣ relay north tries natural 4♣ to see if south likes clubs (wich he should with 4 of them) and we are in business. Obviously a natural 3♣ gets you there better id it promises 4 cards, but I really doubt anyone will think for sure that 3m shows 4 when the 5M332 hands gotta bid them.

[kenberg]

Consider the auction 1♦-2[♠-2NT. Now some people have detailed agreements about what comes next. Many of us do not. I am addressing the situation where the choices are:

1. 3♣ is NMF or some near variant, whereby we can find our najor suit fit)s) but is otherwise undiscussed.

2. 3♣ is natural, either suggesting that this might be one of those hands where 5♣ is better than 3NT or, more likely, that 6♣ may be a viable slam.

 

I am claiming that option 2 is frequent enough so that if 1 and 2 are my choices, i think that 2 is the better choice.

 

Of course I get dealt 5-3-3-2 hands. Imo, the way to deal with this is to rebid 3♠, forcing. Let's just assume for the sake of discussion that weak junl shifts are being played. This means that responder will never have a six card suit and want to sign off at the three level in spades. He would have bid 2♠ on the first round with that hand. And if he has only five, it is touch and go whether signing off 3♠ is better than passing 2NT. So playing this as forcing may not be perfect, but it is not horrible. The times when both it would be right to sign off in 3♠, and when you can be confident it would be right to sign off in 3♠, will be infrequent.

 

I am more than willing to concede that there could be some elaborate checkback system that checks on majors and also explores for a slam in clubs. I have never played such a system in any partnership that I have had, but that that's me. But this is the I/A forum and I suspect that most I/A players do not have such a system either.

 

So my recommendation is: Either develop/adopt such an advanced system or else scrap NMF over the 2NT rebids and play all second bids by responder as natural and forcing.

[Zelandakh]

For me,

1♣ = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any

... - 2♣ = hearts and diamonds (at least 5-4), GF

2♦ = relay, usually 18+

... - 2NT = 5 hearts, 4 diamonds

3♣ = relay

... - 3♥ = 2542

3♠ = relay

... - 4♦ = extras, 3 controls

4NT = Q ask

... - 5♦ = ♣Q, no ♦Q

6♦

 

 

If South opens 2NT then it is surely simplicity itself to set diamonds and key card. For example

 

2NT = 20-21 bal

... - 3♦ = 5+ hearts

3♥ = <4 hearts

... - 4♣ = 4+ diamonds

4♦ = 4+ diamonds, <3 hearts

... - 4♥ = RKCB

4♠ = 1 or 4

... - 4NT = Q ask

5♦ = no

... - 6♦

 

If South instead opens 1♦ then there are many roads, depending on methods. One possibility

 

1♦ = nat

... - 1♥ = nat

2NT = 18-19 bal

... - 3♣ = puppet to 3♦

3♦

... - 3♥ = slam try

4♥ = accepting the slam try, showing controls in all side suits and 1 or 4 key cards

... - 4♠ = Q ask

5♦ = no ♦Q

... - 6♦

 

 

I honestly fail to see the problem on this hand as North holds a slam try or slam drive opposite any hand that South is likely to show, and South will accept and slam invite. North's hand is simply too good for any path from South to act as a slam-killer. Perhaps the OP could tell us how they bid it; it sounds like they missed the slam somehow.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Interesting. I would have thought opener might have raised hearts with 4 hearts.

True.

In the case of the 1H response, 3C! is essentially a "relay" to 3D so that Responder can then show his hand type: either the ♥ sign-off, or the 5/4 majors, or ♣ .

[Fluffy]

I see what you mean, I cannot disagree with you, because I have almost always played checkback so have no idea how nmf or natural does.

 

 

I once played with a partner with whoom I had to jump shift 1♣-1♠-1NT-3♦ with 5332 GF in order to find 5-3 fit :). It wasn't that awful, I am all for no conventions when it comes to a 1-session partnership. Missunderstandings are way worse than moysan fits.

[kenberg]

Just to add on a few more words about the natural approach:

 

1♦-1♠-2NT-3♣, forcing and natural. Opener, with three spades, bids 3♠. If responder has five spades, whoopee. He might not have five spades, but if not he will most likely then bid 3NT. Realistically, this hand will now be played in 3NT(usually), or 5♣ (occasionally). If responder holds five clubs, four spades and a strong hand, he would have bid 2♣ over 1♦ and the auction would have begun 1♦- 2♣-2NT (playing 2/1 the 2NT is either too little or too much to open 1NT) and then 3♠ by responder to describe a strong hand with four spades and longer clubs. So 1♦-1♠-2NT-3♣-3♠-3NT is a shapely hand with exactly four spades, longer clubs, and no great strength.

 

I have found that this approach handles most hands pretty well, certainly better than NMF. Mostly, playing pickup, I assume that the 3♣ is NMF and mostly I am right. There is a definite danger of missing 6♣ when opener is something like 2=3=4=4. but that's life playing pickup.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Using NMF as the "ask" ( and traditionally asking for 3 cards of Responder's bid major ) AND using PASS as the only weakness bid, then 3C in the auction below can be natural and GF :

 

1C - 1M

2NT - 3C ( however, since 1C can be as few as 3 cards, 3C should probably be 5 cards )

 

1D - 1M

2NT - 3D ( can be 4 cards since Opener can't have only 3 cards -- see my post # 19 )

[aguahombre]

Using NMF as the "ask" ( and traditionally asking for 3 cards of Responder's bid major ) AND using PASS as the only weakness bid, then 3C in the auction below can be natural and GF :

 

1C - 1M

2NT - 3C ( however, since 1C can be as few as 3 cards, 3C should probably be 5 cards )

 

1D - 1M

2NT - 3D ( can be 4 cards since Opener can't have only 3 cards -- see my post # 19 )

Yes. And for those two situations, (if we agree with your premise --I do) opener must cooperate as if responder is slamming in the minor unless he does have 3-card M support. The other major is out of the picture as a possible strain.

[kenberg]

I agree with the previous teo posts that over 2NT a bid of 3 in the orignal minor can usefully be played as natural.

 

Pursuing my own preference for natural, the following occurred to me. 1m-1M-2NT. Suppose that weak jump shifts are not being played. In that case we have to allow that it is possible responder would like to sign off in 3M. I suppose he might want to if he holds KQxxx and out, but with five cards I think I might just pass 2NT.

 

 

Anyway, I can't say the I have studied Wolff sign-offs but the following (I think it is different from, more primitive than, Wolff) could be useful. A bid of 3♣ over 2NT is forcing and, possibly, the beginning of a sign-off. Opener, if he has three cards in M, now bids them and responder can drop it if he pleases. Lacking three cards in M, opener bids 3♦. Now responder can sign off with 3M. If he does anything else, the clubs are real. I believe the Wolff sign off has more bells and whistles, but for most players I would expect an almost all natural system over 2NT, with this one gimmick as an add-on, would handle all the hands he will see in this decade.

[han]

I don't understand the 1D opening. What is the advantage of opening 1D on this hand as opposed to the natural 1C opening?

 

My auction would be:

 

1C - 1D (4+ hearts)

2NT (balanced 18-19, denies 3 hearts) - 3C (either diamonds or a single suited slam try in hearts)

3D (forced) - 5NT (pick a slam)

6D

 

But I don't frown upon a 2NT opener. As Fluffy says, this is a very powerful hand and in my book 2NT shows a stronger hand than 1D followed by 2NT. After 2NT I would just transfer to hearts and bid 4D as responder. Opener would set diamonds as trumps (however you have agreed to do that) and responder asks for keycards.

[Fluffy]

I don't understand the 1D opening. What is the advantage of opening 1D on this hand as opposed to the natural 1C opening?

Being able to find diamond fit since 1♣ denies 4♦

[kenberg]

There are questions of general approach: Is it better to open a minor 4-4 with 1♣ or 1♦. Are transfer responses to 1♣ openings a good idea. But for this hand, it seems to me that it is hard to argue with the ease of 1♦-1♥-2NT-3♦(natural)-3♠(denying three hearts and showing a spade control). Assuming that North now knows what the key card asking bid is, he asks. He learns the partnership has four Aces, the King of Diamonds, and they do not have the Queen of Diamonds. He bids 6♦.

 

Other methods may well work better on other hands, no doubt there are reasons for other methods. Here it seems to me that science is more likely to create clutter. No doubt is can be handled, but the straightforward approach is, well, straightforward.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

There are questions of general approach: Is it better to open a minor 4-4 with 1♣ or 1♦.

I read on a message board somewhere ( I can't remember when or where ) that when holding an 18,19 count that it is OK to open 1C with 4-4 in the minors ( especially if the ♣ suit is much better than ♦ ) . However, the hand here ( and Fluffy ) convinces me that a 1D open is better .

 

Anyway, I have another sequence in the GGG ( Gnasher's Gameforce Gadget ) which would describe Opener's hand as a 3 2 4 4 after a 1H response to either a 1C or 1D open:

 

South

1m (1C/1D) - 1H

2S! ( artificial GF ) - 2NT! ( asks clarification )

3NT! ( 3 2 4 4 ) - 6D

 

...3NT! denies 4s, denies 3h, denies 5m .. ergo: 3 2 4 4

The other replies to the 2NT! ( ask ) :

... 3m = no 4s, no 3h; just long minor suit ( 5+m )

... 3om ( other minor ) = 4s, no 3h

... 3H = no 4s but have 3h

... 3S = have 4s AND 3h