Bidding problem

[phoenix214]

Your hand is:

♠:K

♥:Qxxxxx

♦:J

♣:AKJxx(don`t remeber if i had 9 or 10)

Partner opens 1♦, which is 11-15 high card points with 2+♦, 1♦ has all balanced hands in the range of 11-15, 5-4 minors or long diamond hands, we don`t open trashy eleven counts, although 1♦ is allowed to have 11 balanced.

How do you bid the hand?

[JLOGIC]

1H?

[ArtK78]

How could anyone possibly respond 1♥ just because you hold six of them? The answer can't be that easy.

 

A 2♣ response is so much better. Establishes the game force, good suit, etc. Then we may introduce the heart suit (maybe, it is kind of trashy) and later show our spade stopper so we can get to the obvious 3NT contract.

 

OK, what is the real question here? Obviously everyone responds 1♥ to 1♦. That can't be the burning issue of this hand.

 

[Of course, if this were natural bidding, I could respond 1♠ and follow up with 5♣ and then 6♥. Partner stole my 1♦ opening.]

[Codo]

Great bidding problem.

I am not sure, should I bid my longest suit? Or my longest major first (mafiastyle)? Well maybe I would need much space to describe my hand, so I better choose the least space consuming bid.

 

So, I am really unsure, whether I should bid 1 ♥. 1 ♥ or 1♥.

[phoenix214]

Well the 1♥ is obvious, i`m not talking about that, but what plan do you have in bidding, answer 1♥ does not help much, so thanks for those replies, i can give the bidding we had at the table

1♦(11-15 2+♦)-1♥(4+♥;0+HCP)

1♠(Exactly 4♠)-2♣(10+HCP asking)

2♥(Min with 3♥)-3♣(Asks for ♣ stop)

3♦(shows diamonds)-4♣(I thought that this should show something like a big two suiter)

4♦(Que)-4♥(To play)

4♠(RKCB)-4(1/4)

Pass

My p misunderstood 4♣, and then did not think that 4♥ is to play.

The real problem is how to bid the hand as a two suiter, because after 1♥ bid and 1♠ rebid i can`t show my hand. 3♣ shows this shape, invitational, 4♣ is splinter

after 2♣-2♥, 4♣ should be a self-splinter i think, so this leaves the problem. Although if you don`t see this problem and just want to say:BID 1♥, ITS OBVIOUS, then you can save your efforts.

[helene_t]

What would 3♣ at responder's second turn show?

 

I don't think you need 3♣ in the 3rd round as asking for a stopper. If you have a GF hand with only four hearts and <4 spades and no club stopper you will probably have some diamonds. Bid 3♦ with those hands and use the 3♣ bid as natural.

 

So I suggest 3♣ at your 2nd turn is invitational and at your 3rd turn is GF. You could use the latter with 4-4 in the rounded suits (or with 5-5 when opener doesn't show heart support).

 

But after opener's 2♥ bid you should set hearts as trump instead of making a nebolous 3♣ bid. If 3♥ is not forcing, maybe 4♦ is a splinter? In any case you need a way to set trumps.

[WellSpyder]

How do you bid the hand?

The simple answer is one bid at a time. We don't know what problems are going to come later in the auction, so can't answer those straight away. Of course there are times when thinking about possible future problems will affect your choice, but if the first bid is as clear as this one then most people will simply bid it and wait to see what happens next. And if the future problems are specific to your agreements about later bids, we are even less likely to worry about them when giving the problem of what to respond.

 

Like helene, I find myself wondering what 3♣ on the second round would have shown. With most of my partners I play this as a big two-suiter (at least 10 and probably 11 cards in the two suits) and GF, so this might have solved your problem.

[Codo]

Well the 1♥ is obvious, i`m not talking about that, but what plan do you have in bidding, answer 1♥ does not help much, so thanks for those replies, i can give the bidding we had at the table

1♦(11-15 2+♦)-1♥(4+♥;0+HCP)

1♠(Exactly 4♠)-2♣(10+HCP asking)

2♥(Min with 3♥)-3♣(Asks for ♣ stop)

3♦(shows diamonds)-4♣(I thought that this should show something like a big two suiter)

4♦(Que)-4♥(To play)

4♠(RKCB)-4(1/4)

Pass

My p misunderstood 4♣, and then did not think that 4♥ is to play.

The real problem is how to bid the hand as a two suiter, because after 1♥ bid and 1♠ rebid i can`t show my hand. 3♣ shows this shape, invitational, 4♣ is splinter

after 2♣-2♥, 4♣ should be a self-splinter i think, so this leaves the problem. Although if you don`t see this problem and just want to say:BID 1♥, ITS OBVIOUS, then you can save your efforts.

 

1. Why do you care to show your shape with 4 clubs? You will play in your heart fit, there is no need to show the opponents your shape. IF 4 ♣ had been discussed and showed the hand type, so that partner can judge his hand better, okay, but without discussion...

I had bid a simple 4 ♥ with 3 ♥ GF and SI a close second choice.

2. Having no way to show a GF twosuiter is a leak in your system. You should play either 1 ♦ 1 ♥ 1♠ 3 ♣ or 1♦ 1 ♥ 1 ♠ 2 ♣ 2♦/♠/NT 3 ♣ with this hand type.

[PhilKing]

Although if you don`t see this problem and just want to say:BID 1♥, ITS OBVIOUS, then you can save your efforts.

 

Yes, they are silly. I knew this was going to be a round six mix-up regarding kickback, but that's because I'm a mind-reader.

 

Back to the problem, once you actually gave it - just bid 4♥ over 2♥. Your alternative is 3♥ which should be a slam try setting the suit, but IMO you are not really worth that since if partner has ♥AK and the ♠A, you are still not home yet and partner should stretch to bid 3♥ even with a minimum in high cards holding such good controls.

[phoenix214]

1. Why do you care to show your shape with 4 clubs? You will play in your heart fit, there is no need to show the opponents your shape. IF 4 ♣ had been discussed and showed the hand type, so that partner can judge his hand better, okay, but without discussion...

I had bid a simple 4 ♥ with 3 ♥ GF and SI a close second choice.

2. Having no way to show a GF twosuiter is a leak in your system. You should play either 1 ♦ 1 ♥ 1♠ 3 ♣ or 1♦ 1 ♥ 1 ♠ 2 ♣ 2♦/♠/NT 3 ♣ with this hand type.

Well how would the bidding go, if now you bid a slam try 3♥ on round 3?, i think it isn`t that good because i don`t want my p to evaluate his spades and diamonds as good cards, so that is the way i bid. Asking for aces can solve the problem, but then it usually would result in 5♥ going off, when partner doesn`t have the right cards.

Of course you can bid 4♥ straight after 2♥, but then there is a risk missing a cold slam. If p has AK♥ and and ace on the side, then the slam is good enough to bid, at least according to my math.

[PhilKing]

Well how would the bidding go, if now you bid a slam try 3♥ on round 3?

 

How can we possibly tell? What is partner's hand?

 

And by any chance are you interested in why we would not look for slam?

[Trinidad]

Well the 1♥ is obvious, i`m not talking about that, but what plan do you have in bidding, answer 1♥ does not help much, so thanks for those replies, i can give the bidding we had at the table

1♦(11-15 2+♦)-1♥(4+♥;0+HCP)

1♠(Exactly 4♠)-2♣(10+HCP asking)

2♥(Min with 3♥)-3♣(Asks for ♣ stop)

3♦(shows diamonds)-4♣(I thought that this should show something like a big two suiter)

4♦(Que)-4♥(To play)

4♠(RKCB)-4(1/4)

Pass

My p misunderstood 4♣, and then did not think that 4♥ is to play.

This is daisy picking. After you hear 2♥, you know enough. Your partner has a minimum with 3 hearts. You have the values for game, bid it! What does partner need to have for slam? He basically needs 3 key cards (and, if the ♥A is not one of them also the ♥J) which amounts to 12 HCPs and he won't have more than 13. And then you still have the club suit to solve.

 

You have to weight your options:

- Simply bid 4♥, usually make it, sometimes with the help of the opponents because of your anonymous auction (or did you think that 4♥ is cold?)

- Try a convoluted auction, telling the opponents what you have, risking a misunderstanding with your partner, and find out 4 rounds of bidding later that you still can't tell whether partner has this one in a million hand that contains 3 keycards and a four or five card club suit

 

It may be clear that I am a fan of bidding 4♥.

 

This simple bidding comes with an additional advantage that is not so obvious at first: When you actually do start to look for a slam, partner knows that you are not looking for a miracle hand.

 

The real problem is how to bid the hand as a two suiter, because after 1♥ bid and 1♠ rebid i can`t show my hand. 3♣ shows this shape, invitational, 4♣ is splinter

after 2♣-2♥, 4♣ should be a self-splinter i think, so this leaves the problem. Although if you don`t see this problem and just want to say:BID 1♥, ITS OBVIOUS, then you can save your efforts.

That is a system problem:

You are complicating matters if you play 2♣ as only invitational (and asking) and 3♣ as only invitational (and natural). One of the two should be forcing to game.

 

Rik

[Codo]

Well how would the bidding go, if now you bid a slam try 3♥ on round 3?, i think it isn`t that good because i don`t want my p to evaluate his spades and diamonds as good cards, so that is the way i bid. Asking for aces can solve the problem, but then it usually would result in 5♥ going off, when partner doesn`t have the right cards.

Of course you can bid 4♥ straight after 2♥, but then there is a risk missing a cold slam. If p has AK♥ and and ace on the side, then the slam is good enough to bid, at least according to my math.

 

Well nobody so far would like to make a slam try. We all want to bid 4 ♥ over 2 ♥ to avoid 5 ♥ -1... It does not pay to play partner for a perfect minimum.

 

But lets assume that we are in gambling mood - or that we have aslightly stronger hand, f.e. the king of hearts and a low spade instead of the king of spades and a low heart and make a slam try. OVer 3 ♥ we will listen to partners bid and show our nonserious slam try by bidding or avoiding 3 NT or by bidding 4 ♥. I have no idea which way you prefer.

[Fluffy]

You miss ♠A ♥AK ♦A ♣Q, partner is not going to have 4 of those cards with a precision opening normally. He would need something like a perfect maximum for it to work.

 

Ok, I can like with 3♣, if partner shows stopper with ♣Q or maybe ♣10xxx maybe then 5 level is almost safe, and all you need is RCKW to see if he has the perfect 3 keycard hand for slam. But partner DENIED ♣Q. And insisted to show lenght and strength on your short suits. What else do you need to place the final contract where it belongs?

[PhilKing]

If partner understands 4♣ as showing a big heart/club two-suiter, he will drive slam:

 

♠Axxx

♥Kxx

♦AJxx

♣xx

 

Whilst it has some play, it is VERY poor.

 

Personally, I think 4♣ is a cue for diamonds, since I would always bid 3♥ to confirm hearts as trumps.

[phoenix214]

Well now then what do you call a good slam to bid?, What is your minimum percentage for it to work ?

[PhilKing]

Well now then what do you call a good slam to bid?, What is your minimum percentage for it to work ?

 

Same as everyone elses - circa 50%, but it's not an exact science. However, overall efficiency can be increased by avoiding desperate auctions like this one, but you are free to just put your fingers in your ears if you want.

[ArtK78]

All other things being equal, at IMPs you want to be in any small slam that is better than 50%.

 

Nonvul, if you assume that 11 tricks is the limit of the hand, the difference between bidding (-50) and not bidding (+450 or +460) a slam in a major suit or NT is 500 or 510 points, which is 11 IMPs. If you assume that the slam makes, the differehce between bidding (+980 or +990) and not bidding (+480 or +490) a slam in a major suit or NT is 500 points, which is 11 IMPs. So it is exactly a 50-50 proposition. This doesn't include situations in which you go down more than one, slam gets doubled, etc.

 

Vul, the numbers are -100 vs. +650 or +660 if 11 tricks is the limit of the hand (13 IMPs) and +1430 or +1440 vs. +680 or +690 if slam makes (13 IMPs). Again, this is a 50-50 proposition.

 

I leave it to you to determine the odds for a minor suit slam.

 

The mere mathematical computation is not the be all and the end all at IMPs, as state of the match and the identity of your opposition factor into your computation. In addition, sometimes strange things happen at the other table. Getting to a marginal slam down one looks a lot worse if your opponents have an accident at the other table and play in a part score.

 

At matchpoints, there are other considerations. You have to try to estimate if merely getting to game (or getting to the right game) gives you most of the matchpoints, or if you have a reasonable chance of gaining matchpoints in the play of the hand rather than risking everything in the bidding. So it isn't as easy a question at matchpoints.