Undiscussed, how do you understand this bid?

[Jinksy]

That doesn't work very well when partner holds:

 

AKQ

JTxxx

KQxx

x

 

It will keep you from bidding the grand.

 

But 4♠ EKCB works fine. Are you really stopping short of 5 on any slower bidding sequence?

[WellSpyder]

Interesting. I was the criminal in question, and reasoned that since we had stuff like EKCB, Jacoby, splinters, possibly Josephine or other GF bids followed by 5♥ etc that it had to be preemptive. I also figured that since after 1♥ P, 2♥, 3♥, 4♥, 6♥ and 7♥ are all to play and (except 2♥) preemptive, 5♥ would naturally fit into the pattern.

Maybe how one answers your original question is partly a function of age. You seem to be arguing here that it would be sensible to play 5♥ as natural and to play. That may be right. And it may mean that those who have learnt since all your other stuff became common haven't learnt any other use for the bid.

 

But your original question was how do you understand the bid if it is undiscussed. Although it doesn't come up very often, I think the "standard" meaning I would expect is the one suggested above of pass, bid 6♥ or 7♥ according to whether you have 0, 1 or 2 of ♥A and K. So my best guess would be that this is what partner has in mind. I would not be surprised to be proved wrong, though. (Similarly, if partner opens an undiscussed 4NT I expect him to be asking me to cue-bid an Ace if I have one, rather than asking me to give a B/W response, but I have no real way of knowing whether what he regards as standard is the same as what I regard as standard.)

[aguahombre]

It's a "new partner ask", answers are

 

7♥ = I know a person who would be a good new partner for me, and I even know one who could become your next partner.

6NT = I know a person who would be a good new partner for me, and you are gonna be dumped.

6♥ = There's a guy who could play with either of us, I hope he picks me.

Pass = *****it we are stuck with one another. :(

I believe those are the correct interpretation and continuations. LTC bidders probably are showing their LT count, for opener to bid 1 or two more with 1 or 2 less LTC than the opening showed.

[mgoetze]

You are highly unlikely to have an agreement about exclusion Blackwood if you don't know what a raise to 5♥ is supposed to be.

I have had agreements on exclusion Blackwood with several partners but I've never had an agreement on 1♥-5♥.

[aguahombre]

I have had agreements on exclusion Blackwood with several partners but I've never had an agreement on 1♥-5♥.

I think John was referring to 5H being EXwood in Spades. What a gross idea, which actually was advocated some 60 years ago. All exwood consumes too much room if it starts at the 5-level; reasonable players who know immediately they want to exwood will set trump via splinter and then Wood for exclusion..setting trump via j2n or whatever followed by Wood otherwise.

[mgoetze]

I think John was referring to 5H being EXwood in Spades. What a gross idea, which actually was advocated some 60 years ago.

Yeah, good thing nowadays we know that 4NT should be exclusion for spades!

[blackshoe]

Huh. I always though "Josephine" referred to a jump to 5NT, aka "the Grand Slam Force". :blink:

[aguahombre]

Huh. I always though "Josephine" referred to a jump to 5NT, aka "the Grand Slam Force". :blink:

Yep, hence Timo mentioned it in that context.

[the hog]

1♥ P 5♥

 

Assume you have reasonably detailed system elsewhere but have never discussed this auction (or any 'unnecessary' jump to 5M). What would you expect from responder? Does it make a difference if your 1♥ is

 

a) SAYC, 5+

b) Acol, 4+

c) Strong C (either 4+ or 5+), limited to about 15HCP

d) Fantunes, 5+ and about 15+ points

 

?

 

Bid 6 with good trumps. That is standard practice.

[Jinksy]

reasonable players who know immediately they want to exwood will set trump via splinter and then Wood for exclusion..setting trump via j2n or whatever followed by Wood otherwise.

 

Doesn't that risk an immediate 4N response to the splinter from P forcing you to leap even higher to show your void? (this must be especially likely in Fantunes, where if opener has a positive after a splinter, he probably won't have any open suits)

 

Against that, how many hands justify an EKCB bid of any kind with 3 missing keycards?

[Jinksy]

I have had agreements on exclusion Blackwood with several partners but I've never had an agreement on 1♥-5♥.

 

This. Also, comments like 'you can't/shouldn't be playing x without an understanding of y' seem like the Godwin of this forum. Unlike some bridge players, I was born without a comprehensive understanding of all possible continuations of every convention, and have had to learn them, one after another, not always in one go and often through experience.

[aguahombre]

Doesn't that risk an immediate 4N response to the splinter from P forcing you to leap even higher to show your void? (this must be especially likely in Fantunes, where if opener has a positive after a splinter, he probably won't have any open suits)

 

Against that, how many hands justify an EKCB bid of any kind with 3 missing keycards?

If Partner is going to RKC himself, I am no worse off no matter what method I used to establish the trump fit ---although, it is extremely unlike that I would have a hand where I at the outset I only need Keycard information AND Opener himself only wants keycard information.

 

In other words, aint gonna happen...but if it does, no big deal.

[Jinksy]

If Partner is going to RKC himself, I am no worse off no matter what method I used to establish the trump fit ---although, it is extremely unlike that I would have a hand where I at the outset I only need Keycard information AND Opener himself only wants keycard information.

 

In other words, aint gonna happen...but if it does, no big deal.

 

I can't come up with a non-contrived hand* where your approach seems to go horribly wrong, but I can't easily come up with one where it gains over the standard approach (ie 1M P 5m as EKCB) either. Assuming you play EKCB 30 41, as seems most sensible, do you envisage responder bidding 5D with only 1KC? Or is your concern with the trump queen on that system? Or are you more worried about space for finding grands?

 

* Here's a contrived one: x QJTxx Axx KQJx opposite KQJx Kxxxx - Axxx, which IMO on your system might go 1H 4D / 4N 5N / P??? and on a standard EKCB auction might go 1H 5D / 5H P

[razorsharp]

The scientists have had this one right since 1927. Pure & simple, a "THOUGHT PROBLEM" solved logically.

5H shows headless H support Qxxx or xxxxx and a totally solid hand outside - PLUS at least one VOID!

Having a void confounds the use of Key-card Blackwwod, and how can you excpect to get to Exclusion Blackwood from here - the opponents are about to erupt and spoil your party.

"Bid one heart higher, partner, for any A &/or K of trump!!"

[aguahombre]

I can't come up with a non-contrived hand* where your approach seems to go horribly wrong, but I can't easily come up with one where it gains over the standard approach (ie 1M P 5m as EKCB) either. Assuming you play EKCB 30 41, as seems most sensible, do you envisage responder bidding 5D with only 1KC? Or is your concern with the trump queen on that system? Or are you more worried about space for finding grands?

 

* Here's a contrived one: x QJTxx Axx KQJx opposite KQJx Kxxxx - Axxx, which IMO on your system might go 1H 4D / 4N 5N / P??? and on a standard EKCB auction might go 1H 5D / 5H P

You have different criteria for splinters in your contrived example, and possibly different criteria for using RKC at all. So, perhaps you are right. My methods won't work for you. The responding hand you give would neither fall into the narrow range of our splinters nor be a hand which intended at the outset to ERKC.

[aguahombre]

The scientists have had this one right since 1927. Pure & simple, a "THOUGHT PROBLEM" solved logically.

5H shows headless H support Qxxx or xxxxx and a totally solid hand outside - PLUS at least one VOID!

Having a void confounds the use of Key-card Blackwwod, and how can you excpect to get to Exclusion Blackwood from here - the opponents are about to erupt and spoil your party.

"Bid one heart higher, partner, for any A &/or K of trump!!"

5NT has already been mentioned.

[Jinksy]

You have different criteria for splinters in your contrived example, and possibly different criteria for using RKC at all. So, perhaps you are right. My methods won't work for you. The responding hand you give would neither fall into the narrow range of our splinters nor be a hand which intended at the outset to ERKC.

 

Ok, I didn't think it was obviously an EKCB bid of any kind, just a conceivable one. Can you give me a clear example of a hand which would do worse in the 'normal' EKCB approach though?

[aguahombre]

Ok, I didn't think it was obviously an EKCB bid of any kind, just a conceivable one. Can you give me a clear example of a hand which would do worse in the 'normal' EKCB approach though?

Will send a PM; we are off the reservation of this thread. However, the "normal" EKCB approach when (say) Hearts are trump and Diamonds are the exclusion suit starts with 5D gobbling much too much space and IMO is brutal.