Thoughts?

[wyman]

MP, NAP-B district qualifier

 

Void AQ9x AKJTxx Jxx (dealer)

Axx Txx Q9xxx Ax

 

1D (1S) 2S (3S)

4H (P) 4S (X)

XX (P) 5C (P)

6D AP

[the hog]

What is 2S? Limit in Ds or GF?

Whatever, 4S is a huge overbid.

[wank]

agree with 4s, object to 5c. signing off with 2 bangers would be pretty pathetic imo. it's time to back off though once 4s gets blued - you cued because you had 2 bangers and now it transpires you only have 1.

[aguahombre]

As it happens, with slightly different agreements North would know about wasted spade value at the outset. 2D inverted with spade control, 2S LR+ without spade stop.

 

Nevertheless, on the given auction thru 4SXX, things are fine. North's redouble to show the same first-round control that South has already shown must demand a Club Cue with the ace. North should then bid only 5D over 5C having shown slam interest despite the wasted spade bullet; and South will continue with a fitting heart Honor , or Pass with his 3 small hearts.

[lowerline]

MP, NAP-B district qualifier

 

Void AQ9x AKJTxx Jxx (dealer)

Axx Txx Q9xxx Ax

 

1D (1S) 2S (3S)

4H (P) 4S (X)

XX (P) 5C (P)

6D AP

 

I assume that 2♠ is inv+ with diamond support and that 4♥ and 4♠ are control-showing bids. Is redouble showing first round control in spades?

If all my assumptions are correct, the bid that doesn't make sense is 5♣... Responder should have signed off in 5♦ instead.

 

Steven

[Trinidad]

I agree with Aguahombre. North started the cueing, South is supposed to co-operate in cuebidding below game, which is exactly what South did. North knows that all suits are controlled, but not whether there are 12 tricks. Then he shouldn't bid the slam.

 

Rik

[wyman]

2S = LR+

4S = ctrl (1st or 2nd)

XX = 1st

 

There was some ambiguity as to the meaning of 4H.

[Fluffy]

we can debate on 4♠, but 5♣ is really terrible, failed to limit his hand, but what is worse, he knows ♠A is useless, its really an awful overbid.

[wyman]

Do you think 4H denies a club ctrl or can this just be pattern?

 

If it denies, do you think 5C shows 1st and 2nd rd club ctrls (independent of the actual south hand)?

[aguahombre]

we can debate on 4♠, but 5♣ is really terrible, failed to limit his hand, but what is worse, he knows ♠A is useless, its really an awful overbid.

V - AKQX AKXXXX JXX. Partner will think your 5C was really terrible? Or will he think, "What must I do to get partner to cooperate?"

 

The only incorrect bid on the OP auction was the jump to 6D after 5C.

[cherdano]

V - AKQX AKXXXX JXX. Partner will think your 5C was really terrible? Or will he think, "What must I do to get partner to cooperate?"

 

The only incorrect bid on the OP auction was the jump to 6D after 5C.

Lol, we already showed a limit raise, and cooperated with a slam try once. If partner doesn't force to slam with this hand opposite a cuebid, it's only for the better if the partnership ends right on the spot.

[quiddity]

edit: I don't think this is as simple as Cherdano implies. The bidding is at the four level when it gets back to opener. To me it "feels" like shape is still more important than controls for opener's first rebid, even at this high level, especially when we expect possible further competition. So I don't think he should cuebid 4C with shortness or Hx in preference to showing a source of tricks in hearts. Therefore (to me) 4H did not deny a club control, 4S did not promise a club control, and North should not force to slam lacking a club control. It follows that South should show his control and North should bid 5D since he has a slam-invite, not a slam-force.

 

I have nearly zero-confidence in the opinion above though; if a very strong player told me that it's much better to cuebid controls then I would happily switch.

[cherdano]

The idea that North, with a slam force requiring a club control, should just bid slam over 4♠ with clubs potentially wide open is unpersuasive.

His partner showed a limit raise and cooperated with a slam try. His opponents bid to 3♠. Do you really want to protect yourself for the day when partner has ♠AKQ for his limit raise, AND doesn't realize that his AKQ are probably wasted opposite spade shortness???

[quiddity]

His partner showed a limit raise and cooperated with a slam try. His opponents bid to 3♠. Do you really want to protect yourself for the day when partner has ♠AKQ for his limit raise, AND doesn't realize that his AKQ are probably wasted opposite spade shortness???

 

Sorry, I wrote that reply without thinking enough and then edited it - probably our posts crossed.

I agree that on the hand with AKQ of hearts there isn't much room for doubt.

[cherdano]

I agree that 4♥ as a natural slam try is a very good agreement.

However, at some point you have to show values, not just controls. You can't make the maximum number of cuebids possible when you are unlimited and have a misfitting minimum.

[wyman]

Thanks for the discussion so far. A curveball, because I want to get away from the question of south limiting himself:

 

What if north were in 4th chair, so S is limited to begin with?

 

(a) Do you agree with XX over 4S?

(b) Given XX, do you agree with 5C?

© Given XX/5C, do you agree with 6D?

[wyman]

Thanks for the discussion so far. A curveball, because I want to get away from the question of south limiting himself:

 

What if north were in 4th chair, so S is limited to begin with?

 

(a) Do you agree with XX over 4S?

(b) Given XX, do you agree with 5C?

© Given XX/5C, do you agree with 6D?

 

Bump for thoughts, but if no one has any, I'll let this thread die.

[aguahombre]

If South would have passed in 2nd chair with AXX KXX XXXXX AX, then:

 

a)yes

b)yes

c)no (Same as before, 6D was the unnecessary unilateral action in a partnership exchange.)

 

I probably would have passed in 2nd chair with that, even though A-K-A is neat, just because my long suit is a minor and is so crappy.

 

I know the saying about "Don't look for the perfect cards...", but North could --so he did; but then he blew the trust with the blast to 6D.

 

BTW: according to OP agreements, South could have KXX KXX XXXXX AX and still have cuebid 4S. This one I surely would have Passed in 2nd chair.

Edited October 31, 2013 by aguahombre

[P_Marlowe]

Do you think 4H denies a club ctrl or can this just be pattern?

 

If it denies, do you think 5C shows 1st and 2nd rd club ctrls (independent of the actual south hand)?

I would assume, that the 2S bid by responder denied 4 hearts, so 4H is simply showing values ( is a

control bid, denying a club control as well.

I would prefer 4S, instead of 4H, this has to be a void, showes the shape.

 

But 5C is over the top.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[bd71]

Thanks for the discussion so far. A curveball, because I want to get away from the question of south limiting himself:

 

What if north were in 4th chair, so S is limited to begin with?

 

(a) Do you agree with XX over 4S?

(b) Given XX, do you agree with 5C?

© Given XX/5C, do you agree with 6D?

 

(a) Yes. This should be automatic with no suggestion of extra strength.

(b) Yes. I guess you could have agreements that you're not forced to cue-bid controls beneath game-level in a GF auction when partner has shown great strength, but I don't think that's wise. Need to cooperate and show the club control, still not suggesting any extra strength.

© No, strongly. Not strong enough to force slam. Knowing partner has at least a wasted king in spades, have a really hard time constructing even a perfect minimum limit raise that makes slam near cold. Best I can do is Kxxxx Kxx Qxxx x, which is still an iffy slam. Partner might not have a minimum, but he can show life himself if so. Also don't want to stretch for slam at matchpoints if I think I'm competitive with the field. Only partner knows whether his spade holding is such that 3N is playable, so he's the one who needs to risk the slam to escape a likely bad matchpoint result in 5D.

[wyman]

Well:

 

North felt strongly that South shouldn't have bid 5C with:

a) a wasted ♠A, and

b) ♥xxx

And (s)he defends 6D, saying that even on the given hand we might make 6D on a non-club lead, so if South shows up with heart shortness, 6D is likely to be an excellent spot.

The hands North said (s)he was imagining were roughly: Kxxx / x / xxxxx / AKx or Kxxx / Kx / xxxx(x) / Ax(x)

 

South felt that (s)he was worth one more try holding 2 aces, since North was obviously distributional, and if North is 0562 -- not unlikely on this auction, especially since North chose to bid 4H instead of 4S -- then the spade ace is not wasted. Not to mention that 5C keeps us below 6D, and South can hardly have more values.

[aguahombre]

Well:

 

North felt strongly that South shouldn't have bid 5C with:

a) a wasted ♠A, and

b) ♥xxx

And (s)he defends 6D, saying that even on the given hand we might make 6D on a non-club lead, so if South shows up with heart shortness, 6D is likely to be an excellent spot.

The hands North said (s)he was imagining were roughly: Kxxx / x / xxxxx / AKx or Kxxx / Kx / xxxx(x) / Ax(x)

 

With the example hands being quite possible, we have --as stated before-- a case where the auction is fine up through 5C...and then North not giving South the credit for the brains to continue to 6D over 5D with them, but rather just breaking the cooperation and deciding all by himself.

[bd71]

Well:

 

North felt strongly that South shouldn't have bid 5C with:

a) a wasted ♠A, and

b) ♥xxx

And (s)he defends 6D, saying that even on the given hand we might make 6D on a non-club lead, so if South shows up with heart shortness, 6D is likely to be an excellent spot.

The hands North said (s)he was imagining were roughly: Kxxx / x / xxxxx / AKx or Kxxx / Kx / xxxx(x) / Ax(x)

 

South felt that (s)he was worth one more try holding 2 aces, since North was obviously distributional, and if North is 0562 -- not unlikely on this auction, especially since North chose to bid 4H instead of 4S -- then the spade ace is not wasted. Not to mention that 5C keeps us below 6D, and South can hardly have more values.

 

Except MAYBE Kxxx Kx xxxx Axx, those hands aren't minimum limit raises. I'm not real sophisticated yet at using constructed hands to make these types of decisions, but it seems if you have to assume an extra trump beyound what partner has shown, you're likely in a danger zone.