How do you handle this one?

[ArtK78]

Swiss teams. First seat, vul against not. You hold:

 

 

 

[hv=pc=n&n=skqjt962hadkqj62c&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1sp1np3dp3np?]133|200[/hv]

 

You are playing 2/1 game forcing. 1NT was forcing one round.

 

(1) Do you agree with the bidding so far?

(2) What now?

[aguahombre]

I started out with an 11-trick hand for spades, and only want to know about two specific cards. Our methods make this an obvious 2♣ opener, followed by 3♠ to demand answers to those specific concerns.

 

If partner has only the spade ace, and only two diamonds...will take my chances anyway. If partner has neither bullet, we won't be past the 4-level when we know that.

[Fluffy]

yes, bidding is fine.

 

Now there are 2 options, 5♠ or 6♠, wich IMO show around 10.25 tricks and 11.25 tricks respectivelly. I will bid only 5♠ because I don't have ♦10.

[mikeh]

I prefer 2♣ even tho the odds of 1♠ being passed out are tiny. Some hands are just too good to open 1♠.

 

2♣ would be perfect if partner bid 2♥ immediate negative (we'd bid 4♠ knowing we didn't have slam). Over a waiting 2♦ I wouldn't bid 3♠ setting trump because in my methods we can't now cuebid the spade A, which is a fairly important card. I'd need him to specifically bid 4♦ and then take my non-jump 5♣ as exclusion, neither of which is likely.

 

However, I can certainly live with the 1♠opening.

 

Partner is now warning us that slam is unlikely. He has values in clubs and hearts, which don't help us very much B-)

 

But I guess he could still have a key Ace. I bid 5♠.

 

I disagree with Gonzalo on the meaning of 6♠ here. To me, 6♠ says I think we are making slam most of the time. And this auction strongly suggests that we are not. Partner is unlikely to hold either pointed Ace.

 

On the auction, where I have suggested a huge two suiter, partner should only move on with a relevant A, tho he may wonder why, if all I needed was a specific A, I didn't open 2♣.

[ArtK78]

OK. Having received a few responses, I am going to turn this one into an "Assign the Blame."

 

Here is the full hand and the auction:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s3hq86542da5ckj62&n=skqjt962hadkqj62c&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1sp1np3dp3np4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

(1) Do you agree with South's two actions?

(2) Should either North or South have done more at their last turns to call?

 

By the way, this hand was a push at +680, which just demonstrates that this is not trivial.

[aguahombre]

2♣ would be perfect if partner bid 2♥ immediate negative (we'd bid 4♠ knowing we didn't have slam). Over a waiting 2♦ I wouldn't bid 3♠ setting trump because in my methods we can't now cuebid the spade A, which is a fairly important card.

The concern about the 3S rebid after 2C used to be a problem. Since we don't use that tool indiscriminately, we can afford for Partner to show the Ace or King of trumps immediately with a jump.

 

2C-2D (waiting)

3S-5D=both pointed bullets.

---4D=diamond Ace, no club Ace or Spade top(6S jump by opener here)

---5S=Spade card, no other prime

---4N=spade card, side king somewhere.

---3n=no bullets, side king somewhere.

---4S=no nothing

---etc....new suits asking by opener.

[Finch]

I have a 2-loser hand. I would not open it 1S, and I am the least aggressive 2C opening there is.

I would open 4NT, specific ace ask. It comes up incredibly rarely, but it's an easy hand to bid (4NT - 5D ace of diamonds - 6S). It might work less well if partner has 2 aces, but I think the downsides of all other actions are worse.

 

If I can't open 1S, I'll open 2C. I honestly can't see how South will let me out short of slam now.

 

Having opened 1S, then bid 3D I can't possibly just bid 4S over 3NT. I've got 11 tricks in my own hand.

[mikeh]

I'd focussed on the 1♠/2♣ issue and had forgotten about the immediate 4N opening. Partner can show 2 Aces, as I understand the method, by jumping to the 6-level in the lower Ace.

 

I think the idea is that opener had better be able to handle all 2-Ace combinations, which seems a reasonable requirement for the opening!

 

The ambiguity of a 6♣ response is usually meaningless. We will bid 6 spades no matter which side A he holds, and of course we might get the delicious 6♦ response over which we bid 7♠

 

If he holds all the Aces, I think he is allowed to bid 7N.

 

On the actual hand, I already commented that he has to raise 5♠ to slam if he holds a pointed Ace on the 1♠ opening, but opener misbid terribly over 3N. I am one of the most conservative bidders around and there is no way I'd bid only 4♠ over 3N. I give the blame entirely to opener.

[mycroft]

5♦-6♦; 6♠? Why can't 3♦ be a "fake" with only 3, and partner is concerned about bypassing 3NT?

 

I'm concerned that 5♠ will not clue partner in to "bid 6 with *either* ace"; but maybe I shouldn't be.

[rhm]

OK. Having received a few responses, I am going to turn this one into an "Assign the Blame."

 

Here is the full hand and the auction:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s3hq86542da5ckj62&n=skqjt962hadkqj62c&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1sp1np3dp3np4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

(1) Do you agree with South's two actions?

(2) Should either North or South have done more at their last turns to call?

 

By the way, this hand was a push at +680, which just demonstrates that this is not trivial.

I think 4♠ is too conservative even though it could be the winning decision and it is anything but clear what South should do over 5♠.

I wonder what 5♣ should mean in this scenario, since 4♣ is certainly forcing.

I know what I would like it to mean and I think it makes sense.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[PhilKing]

North 427% - 100 for 1♠, 100 for 4♠, and another 227% for suggesting that South might have been at fault.

[Finch]

I'd focussed on the 1♠/2♣ issue and had forgotten about the immediate 4N opening. Partner can show 2 Aces, as I understand the method, by jumping to the 6-level in the lower Ace.

 

I think the idea is that opener had better be able to handle all 2-Ace combinations, which seems a reasonable requirement for the opening!

 

The ambiguity of a 6♣ response is usually meaningless. We will bid 6 spades no matter which side A he holds, and of course we might get the delicious 6♦ response over which we bid 7♠

 

If he holds all the Aces, I think he is allowed to bid 7N.

 

On the actual hand, I already commented that he has to raise 5♠ to slam if he holds a pointed Ace on the 1♠ opening, but opener misbid terribly over 3N. I am one of the most conservative bidders around and there is no way I'd bid only 4♠ over 3N. I give the blame entirely to opener.

 

4NT doesn't work very well on reflection, given that the usual responses are 5C = no ace, and 6C = ace of clubs.

I was always taught that 5NT shows two aces, and you are supposed to be able to work it out. Your method is better = 5NT shows the ace of clubs (I assume) & 6 suit shows that suit and a higher one.

We're still a bit stuck on this hand so I'll go back to opening 2C.

[gnasher]

Another good way for North to bid his hand is 1♠-1NT;5♣, which is obviously Exclusion.

[aguahombre]

Another good way for North to bid his hand is 1♠-1NT;5♣, which is obviously Exclusion.

:rolleyes:

[blackshoe]

Another good way for North to bid his hand is 1♠-1NT;5♣, which is obviously Exclusion.

Only if South has some clue that "Exclusion Key Card Blackwood" exists.

[lycier]

after 1♠--1nt,opener also can rebid 4♣ to show singleton or void in ♣ with a super hand,and then responder must cuebid 4♦ showing a first contraol in ♦,opener cuebid 5♣ again,responder return to 5♠,so opener can make a final contract at 6♠ in safe.

[ArtK78]

North 427% - 100 for 1♠, 100 for 4♠, and another 227% for suggesting that South might have been at fault.

No one, including my partner who held the 7150 hand, suggested that I might have been at fault.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 I think the start of the auction was ok

#2 After 3NT bid 4D, 3D did not promise 65, let alone 75

#3 I am not sure, you will reach 6S after 4D, the lack of Aces,

and the lack of fit will dampen South enthusiasm, the only

thing South has a maximum for his bidding, so he may make a

move ..., maybe but it is hard

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I too think that this 2 loser hand should also open 2C.

 

But if there is another option if you chose the 1S open:

 

1S - 1NTF

4C! = self-splinter for ♠

 

But this isn't any better than the 2C open followed by the 3S-jump.... in fact it is worse.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 I think the start of the auction was ok

#2 After 3NT bid 4D, 3D did not promise 65, let alone 75

#3 I am not sure, you will reach 6S after 4D, the lack of Aces,

and the lack of fit will dampen South enthusiasm, the only

thing South has a maximum for his bidding, so he may make a

move ..., maybe but it is hard

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[TWO4BRIDGE]

5♦-6♦; 6♠? Why can't 3♦ be a "fake" with only 3, and partner is concerned about bypassing 3NT?

I think you should limit your GF "fake" ( if you need one ) to the ♣ suit only and leave 3D as natural ( at least a good 4 cards ) .

[Zelandakh]

Strange, my first thought with this hand was a 4NT opening; but it is quickly apparent that neither the traditional responses (6♣ = ♣A, 5NT = any 2 aces); nor the modern tweak (5NT = ♣A, ♣6 = any 2 aces); nor the ultra-modern extension (5NT = ♣A; 6♣ = 2 aces without ♣A; 6♦ = ♣A + a major suit ace; 6♥ = ♣A + ♦A) are sound here. Note that the denial method for 2 aces is marginally better than the positive way Mike gave, since we are more likely to need to stop in a suit where partner does not have the ace.

 

As for how I would bid it, well

 

1♣ = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any

... - 1NT = hearts or hearts and clubs, GF

2♣ = relay, usually 18+

... - 3♣ = 0634 or 1624

3♦ = relay

... - 3♠ = 1624, min

4♣ = relay

... - 4♠ = 3 controls

4NT = relay

... - 5♣ = no heart control

5♦ = relay

... - 5NT = controls in both minors, not in spades

6♠

 

seems to do the trick.

 

In the "natural" auction, it is not uncommon to play 2♣ - 2♦; 3♠ as 4 spades with longer diamonds these days, rather than the traditional self-supporting suit. That makes the hands where you actually do hold the (semi-)solid suit even more fun...

[Cyberyeti]

I'm prepared to go to the 5 level here.

 

1♠-1N-3♦-3N-4♦-4♠-5♣-5♦-6♠ is not silly although I'm not sure of some of the nuances of 2/1 and what exactly 3♦ and 4♦ would show so whether 4♠ is the right bid over 4♦.

[PhilKing]

No poker for me today - all these 1♠ openings have put me on monkey tilt.

 

Two Clubs!

[Cyberyeti]

No poker for me today - all these 1♠ openings have put me on monkey tilt.

 

Two Clubs!

If you're playing exclusion, 1♠ followed by 5♣ exclusion (or 4♣ over 1N if you play this as exclusion) more or less gets you the info you need and 1♠ is very unlikely to be passed out.

 

2♣ tends to have the auction at 6♥ before I get to bid again without me having shown any suits where I'd get to bid 5♦ if I opened 1♠.