you've opened your 9 count, worth a slam try?

[Stephen Tu]

IMPS all nv

You hold ♠KQxxxx♥x♦KJ9xx♣x

 

Playing 2/1, you decided to open 1♠. Auction continues:

1♠ (2♣) 3♣(1) (p);

?

 

(1) limit raise or better in spades, 3+ support.

 

Now what?

 

Anybody have good tools to distinguish between mild slam tries only interested if partner has a GF+ with 3+ aces and help to bring in diamonds, vs. stronger slam tries interested opposite the right min 10 pt inv hands?

[mike777]

3d no problem yet.

[phoenix214]

What would 4♦ be now? :)

I know that i have an agreement that we show splinters only if ops suit, if they bid one. That means that 4♦ should be naturalish, although what it means is a different story. Since we had a bid of 3♦ it show a good hand. If partner reads this as good 2-suiter in ♠ and ♦, with the message of taking only aces in account for the other suits, i think we would have described our hand perfectly, although it may be a bit too weak in terms of pure strength.

That also means that he will only look at key cards, like all the aces + queen of diamonds/jack of spades, i think if he sees 3 aces of QoD then it is an easy slam :)

[ArtK78]

3d no problem yet.

+1

[Stephen Tu]

OK, if you bid 3♦, partner bids 4♣. Now?

 

Also:

- do you have any way to distinguish whether 3♦ was game try or slam try?

- is it worth playing some sort of serious/frivolous 3nt to sort out strength ranges, or is it too valuable as choice of games?

- is partner cue bidding all hands including 10/11 counts that have some sort of useful diamond feature, e.g. some hand like Jxx xxxx AQx Axx

- when should partner leap to 4♠ rather than cue bidding?

[mike777]

game before slam. if that is your question.

 

i play 3nt nonser...but many onlineprefer other.

 

no pard is not cuebidding on crap.

 

 

over 3d....4s is sign off...that is a q?

 

--\

 

 

LET ME clear...game before slam...pard is going to bid...and bid to get us to slam.

 

I dont expect to bid 20-24 pt slam. I dont expect to bid low pt slam...but not all.

 

 

My style will miss many low point slams but not all.

 

 

btw I lose because i mess up playing...not low pt slams.

[Stephen Tu]

game before slam. if that is your question.

One question is how to distinguish a game try from a slam try.

 

i play 3nt nonser...but many onlineprefer other.

On this auction? I play non-serious 3nt after major suit agreement after 2/1 GF sequences, but this is a different auction, since a GF has not been established, and there has been competition. The question is who has discussed whether it should apply here, or not.

 

no pard is not cuebidding on crap.

But "crap" is contextual. Jxx xxxx AQx Axx is on the minimum end for a cue bid, but clearly worth an accept of a diamond game try. But you are still off 2 aces. Should partner cue bid with this hand? What do you do after 4♣ if he does?

 

over 3d....4s is sign off...that is a q?

But 3♦ is ostensibly a game try. The worst hands (LR only, not GF, bad diamond holding) bid 3♠ not 4♠. 4♠ is obviously stronger than 3♠, but weaker than cue bidding. The question is what sort of hands should accept the game try, but not cue?

 

LET ME clear...game before slam...pard is going to bid...and bid to get us to slam.

 

I dont expect to bid 20-24 pt slam. I dont expect to bid low pt slam...but not all.

 

My style will miss many low point slams but not all.

 

You haven't really clarified your style yet, all you've really said is "3d no problem yet".

 

My main thrust of this is how low do you go to stretch for these low-pt count perfecto slams, how does partner distinguish you bidding this hand using presumably the same bids with 1 or 2 more aces?

[mike777]

You haven't really clarified your style yet, all you've really said is "3d no problem yet".

 

My main thrust of this is how low do you go to stretch for these low-pt count perfecto slams, how does partner distinguish you bidding this hand using presumably the same bids with 1 or 2 more

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

not sure what you ask,,can you clarify?

 

 

in any event i expect to miss low point slams often.

 

I dont have a style to bid low point slams over yours. i hope to=

[rhm]

IMPS all nv

You hold ♠KQxxxx♥x♦KJ9xx♣x

 

Playing 2/1, you decided to open 1♠. Auction continues:

1♠ (2♣) 3♣(1) (p);

?

 

(1) limit raise or better in spades, 3+ support.

 

Now what?

 

Anybody have good tools to distinguish between mild slam tries only interested if partner has a GF+ with 3+ aces and help to bring in diamonds, vs. stronger slam tries interested opposite the right min 10 pt inv hands?

3d no problem yet.

+1

I see this differently, not least from practical experience:

 

You opened a very minimum distributional hand and got an inv+ raise.

Be happy that you struck gold and simply bid 4♠. Even to make 4♠ might require imperfect defense. For example opponents might have a diamond ruff

One opponent has already bid. Fiddling around is much more likely to help them, for example they might have a making game themselves or a cheap save.

Yes slam can not be ruled out, but how likely is that, when you miss all first round controls to start with? I would be worried to encourage partner without a first round control.

The trouble is you might easily get too high if you try and I would blame you, not your partner.

 

Take what's under your nose. 4♠ shows already more than minimum values. Partner might continue over that anyway.

Bridge is a game of probabilities and judgment. not of gadgets. And it is not worth chasing black swans.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[Stephen Tu]

not sure what you ask,,can you clarify?

 

??? I don't understand how I can possibly be more clear than the questions I asked already. In my posts, look for sentences that end in a '?' which indicate a question. Answer them.

 

- If partner cues 4♣, how strong do you expect him to be, vs. hands that bid 4♠ instead of 4♣?

- If partner cues 4♣, are you bidding 4♠ or something else, and if so what?

 

in any event i expect to miss low point slams often.

 

Then what is the point of bidding 3♦? Why not just 4♠?

[billw55]

I am with Rainer on this one, 4♠ directly. I already opened this bottom-scraper with no first round controls, if there is slamming going on let partner do it, he probably should with three aces. 3♦ may only help the defense and/or encourage partner too much.

[neilkaz]

Yeah...65 come alive, but the lack of aces makes me cautious. Either 4♠ right away, or 3♦ first as essentially a game try but then bid 4♠ anyhow hopefully showing a bit more than a direct 4♠.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

What's all of this "game try" stuff for a limit raise auction ?

 

If you get a contructive raise, then a new suit is a game try .

 

But when you get a limit raise, I consider a new suit as a Ctrl-cue .... unless of course your partnership is prone to 9 point openings .

[Mbodell]

I think 4♠ is best. But then again, likely playing in the same event, I opened an 8 count and then made a weak slam try with a non-serious 3nt. AT98xxx x AT9 xx seemed like a pretty good hand to me over (opponents silent): 1♠-2♦-2♠-3♠. Partner bid 4 and we just made.

[Stephen Tu]

What's all of this "game try" stuff for a limit raise auction ?

 

I think this "no inviting game after an invite" is certainly a reasonable position. Is there any consensus on this? It would make life easier if 3♦ is clearly a slam try. That gives north a mark time bid of 3s to limit their hand.

 

Does anyone play 3nt artificial on this auction by either player?

 

Otherwise, if those people bidding 3♦ are just bidding 4♠ over 4♣, it seems bidding 3♦ was a little pointless, since partner will just take it as a signoff and indication that 3♦ was just trying for game thus very minimum?

 

Even if this hand is just supposed to bid 4♠, these questions would arise if one held a similar hand + an ace.

 

Which of the following scenarios occurred:

- Given hand cue bid, partner with JTx AKx QTxx Axx took it seriously, drove to 5 level but stopped off 2 aces, down 1 on the diamond ruff

- Given hand followed Rainer's reasoning and bid 4♠, partner tabled Axx Ax Qxxxx Axx, 12 tricks rolled, and this hand was criticized for not cue-bidding. (No d ruff available with A stiff on lead, hard lead for Ax anyway, spades not 4-0)

[neilkaz]

What's all of this "game try" stuff for a limit raise auction ?

 

If you get a contructive raise, then a new suit is a game try .

 

But when you get a limit raise, I consider a new suit as a Ctrl-cue .... unless of course your partnership is prone to 9 point openings .

 

Perhaps I play an unusual method, but for me, one of the benefits of being able to make a limit raise with bids below 3 of the trump suit (Bergen, Jordan, Q=LROB etc) is that there's room to make a game try. This allows for the limit raise range to be expanded (lowered) a bit since with a minimum LR you won't end up in game unless opener has reasonably more than a min opening.

Perhaps this is trying to be too accurate?

 

For me, when you make what is initially a game try and then bid game anyhow when PD stops at the 3 level, you're showing that your 3 level bid was a cue bid and that you had at least mild slam interest.

[gnasher]

Does anyone play 3nt artificial on this auction by either player?

I play that after opener's 3♦, 3NT by responder is forcing to 4♠, saying "I want to accept your game-try, if that's what it was, but I'm leaving room for you to make a slam try if that's what you intended to do." Once opener is known to be unbalanced, the chance that we want to play 3NT is low, and the possibility of slam is increased.

 

By opener, opposite a 3+ card raise I think 3NT has to be natural. You could reasonably play a raise of the cue-bid as a non-serious slam try, though it's a bit cramped.

 

I prefer to play transfers by responder starting from 2NT, with 2NT being a 3-card raise and 3♥ being a 4-card raise. In those methods I play non-serious 3NT opposite the 4-card raise. Opposite the 3-card raise, completing the transfer is currently just a notrump try, but we could also use it to split the range of opener's slam-tries.

 

On the actual hand I'd bid 4♠, for the reasons that Rainer gave, though 4♦ as a sort of fit bid is also appealing.

Edited April 17, 2013 by gnasher

[PhilKing]

My idea of relatively optimal bidding for this generic spot uses the following rules:

 

1. 3NT is to play.

 

2. Step 1 below three major is a random game try.

 

3. When 2. is true, step 2 (not 3M) is a non-serious try. When 2. is not true the next step 1 other than 3M or 3N is a non-serious try (eg 1♥-2♦-3♦-3♠).

 

4. Higher steps are "natural" slam tries promising Hxx or better and the equivalent of 16+.

 

5. Jumping to game shows a decent non-slammish minimum acceptance.

 

Putting that together in the actual sequence:

 

3♦ = min but better than sign-off

3♥ = non-serious

3♠ = worst hand

3NT = natural

4♣+ = serious tries

 

The hand is not possible for me, since I play a 2♠ opening showing 8-11 with six spades, so would have done that.

[the_dude]

I think this "no inviting game after an invite" is certainly a reasonable position. Is there any consensus on this? It would make life easier if 3♦ is clearly a slam try. That gives north a mark time bid of 3s to limit their hand.

 

 

Consensus here. Partner's limit raise was the "game try", a return game try seems ludicrous to me, how finely are trying to slice this?

 

In my world 3D is natural and forcing to game, not ruling out a slam but not necessarily making a slam try either. Therefore by responder 3NT would be Serious and 4C is not.