Best auction?

[SelfGovern]

You're playing a 2/1 system and dealt -, K2, K5xx, AKQJ8xx [edit: To clarify, shape is 0247 with a void in spades]

 

The auction proceeds (no one vul):

1C - (1S) - Dbl - (3S)

??

 

(opps are BBO bots, fwiw)

 

Q1: What is your second call when you've not discussed this auction?

 

Q2: What system do you play in a regular partnership that might make your second call easier?

 

Edit: Thanks all for your considered responses. Those who responded to some other hand or auction, maybe not so much <grin>, other than to reinforce that communication at the bridge table (and away from it) is quite difficult.

But I have taken away that this hand truly has a challenging rebid on this auction. Makes me wish I'd opened a Schenken 2!D.

[end edit]

[mike777]

6 clubs

[WesleyC]

1. I'd bid 4S, planning to pass 5C.

 

2. Over 4S, 4NT would be a last train style slam try.

[mr1303]

I bid 5C

 

I very much doubt partner has an ace, and even if he does, given he couldn't move over 1S, that almost certainly isn't enough for 6C.

[helene_t]

Mark: p doubled 1S

[lycier]

I am willing to bid 5♥ to ask the quality of trump .

[lycier]

Q2: What system do you play in a regular partnership that might make your second call easier?

 

Of course,it is 2/1.

[SelfGovern]

I am willing to bid 5♥ to ask the quality of trump .

I'm confused -- you're willing to commit your side to the 5- or 6-level on a 6-card trump suit?

Do you really have much success with this?

 

Also, in standard methods when opps have bid one suit and we have not cuebid their suit, doesn't a jump to five of our major ask P for 1st or 2nd-round control in their suit? How does that help when I am already void in their suit?

 

In response to your answer to Q2, yes, we are playing 2/1, but you didn't give me an answer to help me understand how 2/1 makes this hand easier than Acol or SAYC.

 

I welcome your further thoughts and clarification.

[SelfGovern]

1. I'd bid 4S, planning to pass 5C.

 

2. Over 4S, 4NT would be a last train style slam try.

 

OK, what is 4!S?

Is there any implication of heart support?

What if, say, your red suits were reversed and you held -, Kxxx, Kx, AKQJ8xx? Would you bid something besides 4!S, or bid differently after the 4!S call?

[lycier]

I'm confused -- you're willing to commit your side to the 5- or 6-level on a 6-card trump suit?

Do you really have much success with this?

 

Also, in standard methods when opps have bid one suit and we have not cuebid their suit, doesn't a jump to five of our major ask P for 1st or 2nd-round control in their suit? How does that help when I am already void in their suit?

 

In response to your answer to Q2, yes, we are playing 2/1, but you didn't give me an answer to help me understand how 2/1 makes this hand easier than Acol or SAYC.

 

I welcome your further thoughts and clarification.

This hand is a big hand.

Pd's double is negative,and should promise 4-card another major.

It is allowed to lose one trick in the side suit ♠,but it is key to the problem on whether or not there is one loser in trump ♥.And it is no use cuebidding others side suits.

Now,how to describe this hand?

In 2/1,willingness to raise to 5 level is to ask pd's quality of ♥ - if holding two top cards in it,can bid to 6♥,it also implies it is no use for partner to have no amount of hcp in the side suits.

[jodepp]

I think any cuebid is premature and will probably only wind up confusing partner about what suit is agreed.

 

4♦ for me. It implies extras, four diamonds and longer clubs which IMO looks much like what I'm holding. At least partner now has more information.

[Jinksy]

4♦ is horrible. We have no interest in playing this hand in anything other than clubs.

[mike777]

give pard as little as:

 

xxx...Axxx...Qxxxx...x

xxx...Qxxx...Axxxx...x

 

and we have chances in 6c, I expect pard to have more.

 

even this has chances:

 

xxx...xxxx...Axxxx...x

[jodepp]

4♦ is horrible. We have no interest in playing this hand in anything other than clubs.

I too think I'm aiming at clubs, but the utility in 4♦ is in suggesting shape and extras, not necessarily suggesting diamonds. I can't see a cheaper non-cuebid that gets that message across.

 

Since when did bidding out one's pattern become gauche?

[gwnn]

This hand is a big hand.

Pd's double is negative,and should promise 4-card another major.

It is allowed to lose one trick in the side suit ♠,but it is key to the problem on whether or not there is one loser in trump ♥.And it is no use cuebidding others side suits.

Now,how to describe this hand?

In 2/1,willingness to raise to 5 level is to ask pd's quality of ♥ - if holding two top cards in it,can bid to 6♥,it also implies it is no use for partner to have no amount of hcp in the side suits.

This hand is big but it only has two hearts, which was his point. Reread the opening post.

[SelfGovern]

This hand is a big hand.

Pd's double is negative,and should promise 4-card another major.

It is allowed to lose one trick in the side suit ♠,but it is key to the problem on whether or not there is one loser in trump ♥.And it is no use cuebidding others side suits.

Now,how to describe this hand?

In 2/1,willingness to raise to 5 level is to ask pd's quality of ♥ - if holding two top cards in it,can bid to 6♥,it also implies it is no use for partner to have no amount of hcp in the side suits.

Sure, partner promised at least four hearts for his negative double. So partner should bid 6!H with AQxx, and we'll be playing a 4-2 fit with Kx opposite AQxx?

Do you have much luck with that -- or even 5-2 trump fits -- in real life?

 

Or perhaps you just didn't see the dash -- your hand is 0-2-4-7 shape. Does this change your answer?

[SelfGovern]

I think any cuebid is premature and will probably only wind up confusing partner about what suit is agreed.

 

4♦ for me. It implies extras, four diamonds and longer clubs which IMO looks much like what I'm holding. At least partner now has more information.

 

I had not given much consideration to a 4!D call, for fear P might think I had something like Jxx, x, AJxx, AKxxx. What would you do with that hand over 3!S? If you would pass, what is the weakest hand you'd find a 4!D call on?

 

I'm trying to figure out if 1) 4!D shows a hand *this* big (i.e., an ace and a QJ away from 6!C),

and,

2) if 4!D is forcing (or will P consider it forcing? Will P be able to act intelligently with something like Qx, Axxx, QJxx, xx, where we want to be in 6!C? Or Qxx, QJxx, QJxx, xx, where 5!C seems great, and 5D pretty darned good? Evaluate partner's rebid over 4!D with both the hand in my original post, and the Jxx, x, AJxx, AKxxx above.)

[jodepp]

I had not given much consideration to a 4!D call, for fear P might think I had something like Jxx, x, AJxx, AKxxx. What would you do with that hand over 3!S? If you would pass, what is the weakest hand you'd find a 4!D call on?

 

I'm trying to figure out if 1) 4!D shows a hand *this* big (i.e., an ace and a QJ away from 6!C),

and,

2) if 4!D is forcing (or will P consider it forcing? Will P be able to act intelligently with something like Qx, Axxx, QJxx, xx, where we want to be in 6!C? Or Qxx, QJxx, QJxx, xx, where 5!C seems great, and 5D pretty darned good? Evaluate partner's rebid over 4!D with both the hand in my original post, and the Jxx, x, AJxx, AKxxx above.)

I would think 4D has to show the bigger hand - I don't think one would introduce a new suit at the four level unless one had extras. If I had the weaker hand you suggested, I might make a competitive double (if I was sure that was how it would be interpreted) or just Pass.

[cherdano]

You certainly cannot bid 4D with a x=y=4=5 hand - if you want to bid with such a hand, you double. I would take it as showing 5=6 in the minors.

 

I would just bid 5♣ - we have a lot of losers, and partner is allowed to raise. I think it's quite likely that partner has the version of the negative double with few points and 6 hearts, in which case five is high enough.

[mike777]

even

 

xxx..AQJxx...xxxx...x

 

gives us chances in 6 and again I would expect this to be a very minimum borderline bid.

 

even

 

xxxx...AQJx...xxxx...x is not hopeless if against the odds.

 

perhaps I am being a bit optimistic but not overly. :)

 

Of course if negative x does not promise values, a constructive hand,that is different but even with less than constructive I showed a few hands that are possible-----------------

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

 

" had not given much consideration to a 4!D call, for fear P might think I had something like Jxx, x, AJxx, AKxxx. What would you do with that hand over 3!S? If you would pass, what is the weakest hand you'd find a 4!D call on? "

edit

 

If you open 1c and rebid 4d with this in your style ok.

[WesleyC]

OK, what is 4!S?

Is there any implication of heart support?

What if, say, your red suits were reversed and you held -, Kxxx, Kx, AKQJ8xx? Would you bid something besides 4!S, or bid differently after the 4!S call?

 

I don't think that 4!S implies heart support, it just shows serious slam interest in a shapely hand (which must imply long clubs). If you do have heart support, you can always correct to hearts later (or bid 5NT as 'pick a slam').

 

I think a double of 3!S would suggest a strong balanced hand (perhaps 18-19 balanced or similar) that was unwilling to bid 3NT.

 

I don't think there's much difference between the slam potential of this hand and [void - Kxxx - Kx - AKQJ8xx] - i'm happy with 4S on both of them.

[waldorf1]

Everybody seems quite optimistic about this hand. Yes, Kx of hearts is a good holding opposite a negative double of spades, but what about the Kxxx of diamonds?

Do you expect partner to cover four losers? Even if you can get to dummy to lead a diamond up, that is only ten tricks if the Ace is onside, and it rates to be with the overcaller, behind you.

For playing in clubs, I think a free bid of 4C is sufficient to describe this hand. But there is another possibility -- a double. Partner may well have a spade stack and leave it in. A third possibility is 4N, showing both minors, with emphasis on clubs. I'm not sure which of these three choices is the best, but I think that all of them are better than unilaterally deciding that we can make something at the five-level, and then figuring out what it is.