the inferior fit

[manudude03]

I posted this hand in the GIB forum when neither hand worked out to hold onto clubs in 7H. What would your auction be? Assume the opponents are silent.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjthkqt985daca7&n=sq643haj3dj853c53]133|200[/hv]

[mike777]

edit

 

honestly I think I get to 6h not 7s :(

[mr1303]

Assuming something vaguely natural

 

2C 2D

2H 2S

3S (Kokish relay) 5S (feel less certain about this one, feels too good to bid 4S but can't see another bid that would set spades)

6C (cue) 6H (cue)

7S

 

There's a fair bit of resulting there.

[shiang]

here's an example of why 4-4 might be better than 6-3 u get more pitches in ur side suit. Although I'd probably just wind up in 6h as a heart is more likely to get roughed by a spade than the other way around.

[Bbradley62]

Assuming something vaguely natural

 

2C 2D

In your system, what does 2C 2N show?

[Fluffy]

I am thinking about 1♥-2♥-2♠-3♠, but it is probably unrealistic.

[whereagles]

A good hand for the EXTENDED FLANNERY convention:

 

2♦ = 5+♥-4♠ 11-15 OR 22+.

 

(I just made that up.)

[Tramticket]

I can't see how you could get to 7S. We would probably agree hearts at the 4 level and there is no room to look at other strains at that level. I would expect something like:

 

2C-2NT

3H-4H

4S-5H

6H

[Jinksy]

We might fluke our way there in a Fantunes auction:

 

1H 1S*

2C** 2D**

2S*** 2N

3H 3S

4C 4H

4N 5C

5D**** 6S

7S

 

* 2H would show 4-7, so this is slightly too good. Take away the JD and it would start 1H 2H, which would make life harder, but 2S 3S doesn't sound like a farfetched continuation.

** Gazz

*** Cheapest positive response

**** Trump queen ask

[MrAce]

I am thinking about 1♥-2♥-2♠-3♠, but it is probably unrealistic.

 

Why is it unrealistic? This is a very common pattern in USA to find 4-4 spade after 1♥-2♥. It does not have to be for grandslam, most of the time 4-4 ♠ will play better than 6-2 or 5-3 hearts.

 

EDIT: Sorry, now I see what you find unrealistic is the 1♥ opener.

[mikeh]

Kokish relay might/should get us to spades, tho whether to grand is difficult to say, especially since knowing that grand is excellent biases the auction.

 

2♣ 2♦

2♥ 2♠

3♠

 

where 2♦ is a positive, gf but waiting response

2♥ is either hearts or various notrump ranges, and forces 2♠

3♠ shows a two suiter with hearts and secondary spades

 

 

Responder has an awesome hand, with every honour working, but how one moves forward is unclear. However, even 4♠ would get S bidding again, I would think, since N promised at least an Ace or a King...it would be a bad day on which the 5 level wasn't safe.

 

I do think that switching the 3-level advances over 2♠ makes sense: 3♣ shows a heart 1-suiter, 3♥ shows hearts and clubs, and 3♦ shows the majors, primary hearts, and 3♠ shows the reds, primary hearts. The idea is to allow responder to agree the second suit below game.

 

Then

 

2♣ 2♦

2♥ 2♠

3♦ 3♠

 

makes it easy. S can cue bid 4♣ and N cues 4♥. Since it is (almost) never right to make one's first cue a shortness cue in partner's main suit, this shows the Ace and now opener can haul out RKCB. Whether we reach grand is still problematic, but opener will probably take a shot at it sice the only time it is bad is when responder has only 4 spades and the stiff heart Ace. Either a 5th spade or a second heart makes the grand pretty good. However, I think one would need to present the S hand only, and give the modified kokish auction to the decision point over the keycard queen ask, showing the spade Q and no side King, if one wanted an unbiased answer.

[jogs]

Why is it unrealistic? This is a very common pattern in USA to find 4-4 spade after 1♥-2♥. It does not have to be for grandslam, most of the time 4-4 ♠ will play better than 6-2 or 5-3 hearts.

 

EDIT: Sorry, now I see what you find unrealistic is the 1♥ opener.

 

I don't think that statement is true. At the 5-6 level the 4-4 often plays one trick better. At lower levels with weaker 4-4 trumps, the 5-3 often plays better. Need an unbiased study to resolve this disagreement.

[MrAce]

I don't think that statement is true. At the 5-6 level the 4-4 often plays one trick better. At lower levels with weaker 4-4 trumps, the 5-3 often plays better. Need an unbiased study to resolve this disagreement.

 

You could have a point, a tiny one at best, if only people could see pd's hand and decide which suit is weaker during the auction. Also 5-3 fits are more vulnerable to tapping than 4-4 fits. But why are we even discussing this, when it is obvious that the auction Gonzalo suggests that opener made at least a game try if not more, with side 4 card majors, and his pd accepted the game try by bidding 3♠ or at worst he is not dead minimum. So we are talking about 2 hands which hold at least 24+ hcp or equivalent assigned value combined, either by judgement or systematically.

 

But if you noticed, both Gonzalo and me, did not start 1♠ with 3♥ and 4♠. We tried to find a spade fit after we decided that we probably have more than just playing partscore, and responder cooperated.

[jogs]

...... Also 5-3 fits are more vulnerable to tapping than 4-4 fits. But why are we even discussing this, ......

 

 

I had never heard this claim before. Our side holds 19-25 HCP nearly four times more often than our side holds 26+ HCP.

These lower level auctions occur much more frequently.

[MrAce]

I had never heard this claim before. Our side holds 19-25 HCP nearly four times more often than our side holds 26+ HCP.

These lower level auctions occur much more frequently.

 

Ok

[kuhchung]

meh deleted

[Fluffy]

Why is it unrealistic? This is a very common pattern in USA to find 4-4 spade after 1♥-2♥. It does not have to be for grandslam, most of the time 4-4 ♠ will play better than 6-2 or 5-3 hearts.

 

EDIT: Sorry, now I see what you find unrealistic is the 1♥ opener.

 

Also the 3♠ raise bothers me. EDIT: north's hand might not be a game accept even with double fit, or maybe it is, hard to know if I am biased sometimes.

[MrAce]

Also the 3♠ raise bothers me. north's hand doesn't look like a game accept even with double fit.

 

Not only double fit but also 7 of 8 hcp in partner's suits. That makes a huge difference to me.

[bigbenvic]

2c 2nt (8-10 flat hand no 5 card Maj))

3c 3s

4nt 5d

5h 5nt (Qs no Kings)

7s*

 

Partner has 4s, 2+ hearts 8-10 points, Ah Qs, no kings, hearts should be fine even without the J, either we ruff it good or he has 3 and we can take 6 tricks, a 4-1 trump break could hurt but cant see 13 tricks in hearts and I like my chances of 13 in spades.

[Fluffy]

Not only double fit but also 7 of 8 hcp in partner's suits. That makes a huge difference to me.

 

It does for sure, but also look at which ones, I hate lonely queens on a 4-4 fit (no intermediates), also ♥Q would be so much better than ♥J that sometimes will be useless, and at best be worth half a trick. So it comes to a close decision, and seeing both hands doesn't help evaluate it properly.

 

EDIT: I also overlooked (for knowing the full hand?) that ♣ doubleton can be useful often, this probably changes things again.

[MrAce]

Yeah, this is why I am not really big fan of auctions when see both hands. We all are biased less or more even if we all try hard not to be.

[helene_t]

Depends. If it's about system then I think it's fine to show both hands. If it's about judgment I agree that showing one hand is better.

[MrAce]

Depends. If it's about system then I think it's fine to show both hands. If it's about judgment I agree that showing one hand is better.

 

I agree Helene, but if only it was clear whether it is about "system" or "judgement"

 

In my own observations in these forums, most of the time so called "judgement" problems are often actually a lack of agreement (system) problems. And vice versa, many times I have seen so called "system" problems are in fact lack of "judgement" problems, but system was charged with guilt.

 

I have seen people who sees "judgement" as a guide to their system as well as seen people who thinks system is a guide to their judgement. Good players seem to be more accurate when deciding which one to give priority on a specific hand that they are faced with, not seeing other hand.. However, players who are not as good seem to be always much more accurate when seeing both hands.

 

Of course the reason why I do not like topics where I see both hands is subjective. I just don't see them as an improvement to my bridge. I just don't seem to be learning something notable to see how other people bid 2 hands when they see both hands. However seeing one hand, I find myself very interested in what other people have to say. Especially when a person introduces his/her analysis and why he takes the action he chose, instead of offering me another toy which seems to match perfectly for the problem in hand.