4441 25 hcp

[pigpenz]

had this hand come up was wondering how most would bid this type of hand?[hv=pc=n&s=sakq4hakqjdq864ca&n=s8632h65dat32ck42&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=2cp2dp3np6nppp]266|200[/hv]

[mikeh]

I agree with the 2♣ opening, but would be happy to be playing kokish, such that over 2♦, I would bid 2♥ as a puppet to 2♠, following which my 2N shows a balanced 24-25.

 

Now partner can stayman and we'll reach 6♠, which is cold on a 3-2 trump break.

 

As it is, over 3N, I would still stayman as N, if it's available, as it ought to be. If N wants to ask for Aces over 3N, a common method is to use the jump to 5♣ as 'super-gerber' with 4 level bids being whatever one uses over notrump openings.

 

I see the horrible spade spots, but partner rates to hold pretty good cards.

 

We do have to untangle the spades after opener bids 3♥, but most pairs have methods: here, it would be (for me) 5N: pick a slam. Opener happily picks spades.

[billw55]

Depending on the agreed range for 2♣ -> 3NT, North might try 4NT quantitative. Seems reasonable otherwise.

[ArtK78]

If 2♦ is game forcing (as it is with pairs who use 2♥ as a negative), then opener can rebid 2NT, which should make the rest of the auction easier. There is no ambiguity about the meaning of 3♣ over 2NT.

 

By the way, the next time you pick up this hand, you have to announce that you are playing the old fashioned strong Roman 2♦ opening and open 2♦. That works well each of the 4 or 5 times in my lifetime that a hand like this one has come up.

[fromageGB]

Similar to Mikeh. I do have a GF/nearGF bid for a 3 suiter with a minor shortage, but would not use it with this hand because the diamonds are poor, and I have the ♣A singleton. Partner will not be able to put sufficient value on ♣K.

 

So it goes 2♣ 2♥(positive, any K+) 3NT(25-27). Playing a standard sort of puppet it then goes 4♣ 4♦ 4♥(spades) 4♠ 6♠. It would be nice for responder to be able to show just where his values lie, to be able to stop in 5, but I do not have the methods. I pot the slam.

[mikeh]

It would be nice for responder to be able to show just where his values lie, to be able to stop in 5, but I do not have the methods.

why do you want to stop in 5?

[fromageGB]

why do you want to stop in 5?

On this hand, I don't, but as responder I cannot see opener's hand. If he has a normal balanced 25 count with a 4 card spade suit, say AQxx AQJ KQx AQJ, and I give him a choice of game or slam but showing ♦A ♣K, he will know the majors are too open for it to be much use. I cannot have anything there at all, else I would bid slam, not suggest. He can pass 5♠.

 

All hypothetical of course. I can't do it, so I hope slam is OK and bid it.

[Phil]

 

I agree with the 2♣ opening, but would be happy to be playing kokish, such that over 2♦, I would bid 2♥ as a puppet to 2♠, following which my 2N shows a balanced 24-25.

 

 

Isn't one of the big benefits of Kokish that you don't have to go jumping around to show the big hands? How do you show 26+?

[mikeh]

Isn't one of the big benefits of Kokish that you don't have to go jumping around to show the big hands? How do you show 26+?

At least in the version of Kokish I play, we break down the notrump ranges into 2 point increments, so eventually we end up having to jump. So a 3N rebid over 2♦ shows 26-27, and after a kokish relay, 28-29. I've rarely had occasion to do either, but 24-25 hands come up sufficiently often that Kokish is worth playing, imo.

[Phil]

At least in the version of Kokish I play, we break down the notrump ranges into 2 point increments, so eventually we end up having to jump. So a 3N rebid over 2♦ shows 26-27, and after a kokish relay, 28-29. I've rarely had occasion to do either, but 24-25 hands come up sufficiently often that Kokish is worth playing, imo.

 

Mike, its pretty effective in Kokish to play the slow 2N as 24+, especially if 2♦ is GF.

 

If 2♦ isn't GF, then, I suppose its risky for opener to move past 4M in some circumstances.

[mikeh]

Mike, its pretty effective in Kokish to play the slow 2N as 24+, especially if 2♦ is GF.

 

If 2♦ isn't GF, then, I suppose its risky for opener to move past 4M in some circumstances.

I'm aware that some use that approach, but frankly prefer a method in which responder is alerted very early on to the range. Otherwise, you risk auctions in which opener, sitting on say 27, feels duty bound to push once more. Now, since for me 2♦ is gf, the risk is relatively low, but all I require for 2♦ is a King. 30 hcp with no fit doesn't assure one of safety.

 

Plus, where does opener, having shown 24+, draw the line in terms of feeling he has undisclosed values? 26? 28?

 

I think it better to 'waste' the extra level immediately by going directly, or by relay, to 3N, and now opener never feels he has left anything unsaid.

 

Imo, using kokish as 24+ means opener will often need to push a level higher at a level where the contract may be in jeopardy, while using my version, opener pushes earlier, and to a level where there is no significant danger. IOW, my method allows the 'captain' of the auction to know the combined values early while yours leaves opener in doubt at a critical stage.

[nige1]

My partner is reluctant to discuss details of how to bid 4441 hands because of their low frequency.

(Useful table from Richard Pavlicek's wonderful site).e.g.

4441 = 2.99%

4441 and 25 HCP = 0.00076%

c.f.

4432 = 21.55%

5431 = 12.93%

6421 = 4.70%

[Phil]

I'm aware that some use that approach, but frankly prefer a method in which responder is alerted very early on to the range. Otherwise, you risk auctions in which opener, sitting on say 27, feels duty bound to push once more. Now, since for me 2♦ is gf, the risk is relatively low, but all I require for 2♦ is a King. 30 hcp with no fit doesn't assure one of safety.

 

Plus, where does opener, having shown 24+, draw the line in terms of feeling he has undisclosed values? 26? 28?

 

I think it better to 'waste' the extra level immediately by going directly, or by relay, to 3N, and now opener never feels he has left anything unsaid.

 

Imo, using kokish as 24+ means opener will often need to push a level higher at a level where the contract may be in jeopardy, while using my version, opener pushes earlier, and to a level where there is no significant danger. IOW, my method allows the 'captain' of the auction to know the combined values early while yours leaves opener in doubt at a critical stage.

 

Whenever one of the hands is balanced, even a big one, captaincy is passed, at least temporarily, to responder.

 

You can draw the line wherever you want, but a 2 point split makes sense. So, with 26 or more, I would expect opener to do something other than accept a Jacoby transfer for instance. Puppet Stayman operates nicely too, although regula stayman gets a little tricky. Fits are found quicker and we have the use of the four level to investigate things.

 

I used to play Kokish with 2 point increments as you do and then I switched. I haven't had a desire to go back. :)

[Fluffy]

when you have 26-29 balanced you do not have a hand for milton work points, you have so much yourself that you know much more of your trick potential counting tricks than points

[fromageGB]

when you have 26-29 balanced you do not have a hand for milton work points, you have so much yourself that you know much more of your trick potential counting tricks than points

That's all very well, but for you to take advantage of your self-knowledge, you need to obtain details of what responder has in order to determine the best contract. You cannot do this in normal methods, and I suppose the relay enthusiasts would have to devise something to cater for this. Normally the strong balanced hand describes itself so that the unknown responder makes the contract decision. Describing yourself as "26-29" does not help much. Hence the need for narrow ranges.

[Fluffy]

you don't understand, its the weak hand that should describe, describing 27 balanced is impossible

[Zelandakh]

Even after the 2♣ - 2♦; 3NT start, North has enough to bid Stayman if you play system on here. Is this not auction exactly the same as yours Mike? I am sure the old-timers from before Kokish would have managed this.

 

Obviously, if you also have a 3-suited gadget you can use this, although with a singleton ace the 3-suited gadget does not usually have any advantage over treating the hand as balanced. Nonetheless, an example of such a gadget in action might be:

 

1♣ = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any

... - 1♦ = most non-GF

1♠ = unbal GF or 18+ 3-suited

... - 1NT = 6-8

2♣ = 3-suited

... - 2♦ = relay

2NT = short clubs

... - 3♣ = relay

3NT = 4441, 24+

... - 4♣ = relay

4♥ = 8 controls

... - 6♠

 

or

 

1♣ = 15+ nat/bal or 18+ any

... - 1♦ = most non-GF

1♠ = unbal GF or 18+ 3-suited

... - 1NT = 6-8

2♣ = 3-suited

... - 2♦ = relay

2NT = short clubs

... - 3♠

4♦ = serious, asks for diamond control

... - 4♥ = diamond control, no heart control

4NT = RKCB

... - 5♣ = 1 key card

5NT = SSA in diamonds

... - 6♠ = no 2nd/3rd round control

 

In the first auction North keeps asking to find South's strength, shape and number of aces and kings. North could ask if South held the ♠Q at this point but slam appears to be at worst on a finesse even if she is not held so just bids it. In the second, North gives up control to South, who keeps asking about North's diamond holding until they find out enough to place the contract.

[fromageGB]

you don't understand, its the weak hand that should describe, describing 27 balanced is impossible

Maybe I don't understand. My approach is to achieve the "impossible" and let the weaker hand decide the contract.

2♣ 2♦(negative), 3NT(balanced 26/27) "decision", including Stayman and transfers.

 

Not a perfect description of 27 balanced, but 26/27 should be enough.