What's the worst hand?

[zillahandp]

P has A,x,kqxxx, AKQxxx at worst

[apollo1201]

My actual hand was Ax-0-Kxxxx-AKQxxx. Partner had a tough problem with the Ace-King in hearts, diamond AJxx, and 3 clubs. At IMP, 7D seems possible. At MP, 6NT seems possible. Pass is probably right, though.

 

Why not a 5NT Josephine? 7 are probably ok if pard has AQ.

 

It reminds me of a thread where I had opened 1D on AK Kxxxx AKxxxx - (I dunno how to find it back...) and pard had bid 1H and I had done the same a bit boldly as my Ds were not solid and xxx could be a loser case. Here the Cs are solid.

[apollo1201]

My actual hand was Ax-0-Kxxxx-AKQxxx. Partner had a tough problem with the Ace-King in hearts, diamond AJxx, and 3 clubs. At IMP, 7D seems possible. At MP, 6NT seems possible. Pass is probably right, though.

 

Why not a 5NT Josephine? 7 are probably ok if pard has AQ.

 

It reminds me of a thread where I had opened 1D on AK Kxxxx AKxxxx - (I dunno how to find it back...) and pard had bid 1H and I had done the same a bit boldly as my Ds were not solid and xxx could be a loser case. Here the Cs are solid.

 

At leastit conveys what you need from partner to bid 7 while 6D is less clear.

[apollo1201]

My actual hand was Ax-0-Kxxxx-AKQxxx. Partner had a tough problem with the Ace-King in hearts, diamond AJxx, and 3 clubs. At IMP, 7D seems possible. At MP, 6NT seems possible. Pass is probably right, though.

 

Why not a 5NT Josephine? 7 are probably ok if pard has AQ.

 

It reminds me of a thread where I had opened 1D on AK Kxxxx AKxxxx - (I dunno how to find it back...) and pard had bid 1H and I had done the same a bit boldly as my Ds were not solid and xxx could be a loser case. Here the Cs are solid.

 

At leastit conveys what you need from partner to bid 7 while 6D is less clear.

[Kaitlyn S]

P has A,x,kqxxx, AKQxxx at worst

If partner knows Blackwood, he won't have this hand.

[Winstonm]

A, x, AKQx, AKJxxxx

[zillahandp]

Kaitlyn the question was whats the worst hand, look at the actual hand! The only logical explanation is the bidder taking achance on you having one ace or a lucky lead. Its bad bidding thats the point. There is no way the bid can be a try for seven whither slow arrival? blackwood cue bids all sorts of bids are available on the actual hand all better than 6d

The right bid would seem to be 5nt gsf, 6c reply neither 6d. One of ak of d so on actual hand 6d is raised to 7

[zillahandp]

Kaitlyn the question was whats the worst hand, look at the actual hand! The only logical explanation is the bidder taking achance on you having one ace or a lucky lead. Its bad bidding thats the point. There is no way the bid can be a try for seven whither slow arrival? blackwood cue bids all sorts of bids are available on the actual hand all better than 6d

The right bid would seem to be 5nt gsf, 6c reply neither 6d. One of ak of d so on actual hand 6d is raised to 7

[kenrexford]

5NT has two issues, IMO.

 

The first issue is that five no-trump might be taking it as a choice of slams between clubs and diamonds. That seems unlikely. However imagine opener holding solid clubs King 4th in diamonds. In the actual layout but Opener 4 diamonds responder can cash Ace King of Hearts ditching 2 diamonds and make 6 clubs even if diamonds split poorly.

 

The greater problem is that in theory the Queen of Diamonds is not actually a needed card, in theory. I would imagine that on this hand responder is very likely to have 5 diamonds if he does not bid a major.

[zillahandp]

No ken it can only be diamonds.

[zillahandp]

And your theory it must be five is not sound what do you bid on kxx, kxx, xxxx, xxx, do you want to be declarer in nts?

[Caitlynne]

I cannot imagine anything other than a singleton in hearts, their suit (never void - a void would demand a cue bid or jump cue bid) excellent diamonds, solid clubs as a source of tricks, and the Ace of spades. e.g.

 

A

x

KQxxx

AKQxxx

 

So, if I had your hand, its an easy 7D bid.

[Kaitlyn S]

I cannot imagine anything other than a singleton in hearts, their suit (never void - a void would demand a cue bid or jump cue bid) excellent diamonds, solid clubs as a source of tricks, and the Ace of spades. e.g.

 

A

x

KQxxx

AKQxxx

 

So, if I had your hand, its an easy 7D bid.

Why wouldn't this hand bid 4NT?

[kenrexford]

And your theory it must be five is not sound what do you bid on kxx, kxx, xxxx, xxx, do you want to be declarer in nts?

Likely to have is not synonymous with must have.

[ShirleyMqz]

I'm not surprised by the actual hand.

 

The key thing here is that it has to show a hand that is massively minor-suit oriented. The opponents probably have a good fit available in one or both of the majors and you want to make it hard for them to find it and sacrifice over your minor suit slam.

[Kaitlyn S]

I've read all the replies and I still think that the best hand for this auction is either ---, xxx, AKQx, AKQJxx or xxx, ---, AKQx, AKQJxx. (up to Qxx in the bad suit.) Look at the upside. If the sacrifice is right, lefty has to bid 6H instead of suggesting it. If the opponents lead the right major and partner can't stop three rounds, you give up 200 against a part score, whereas if the opponents lead the wrong suit, you steal a small slam on a partscore hand.

 

What do you lose? If your opponents have methods to make forcing bids in a minor suit auction, and can find a first round control, you may lose 13 IMPs. How many pairs have these methods? Furthermore, if you don't (and I don't), you can't bid that grand anyway. Too many pairs bid first or second controls so 7 isn't that likely to be reached. Besides, they have to have a 13th trick (like a 6th diamond) because a grand on a 2-2 trump break is a bit much.

[Fluffy]

I will try to guess based on the info of high cards since otherwise it is too hard.

 

Partner is obviously void in spades, there is no other reason to preempt the bidding, a void in hearts would be shown with a splinter bid or exclusion blackwood aiming to grand. A spade void cannot be shown.

Partner has reasonably solid clubs, AK long is the least, but AQ could be enough gambing on ♣K not on left.

 

Partner has at most 1 loser in diamonds

 

Partner has at most 1 loser in hearts.

 

 

So it is easy to construct

 

-

x

Kxxxx

AQxxxxx

 

As the worst psosible hand. But I'd bet he has ♦KQ and ♣AKJ

[Fluffy]

My actual hand was Ax-0-Kxxxx-AKQxxx. Partner had a tough problem with the Ace-King in hearts, diamond AJxx, and 3 clubs. At IMP, 7D seems possible. At MP, 6NT seems possible. Pass is probably right, though.

 

Was there any special rule in the game you were playing where you couldn't bid the same suit as opponents?

[apollo1201]

My actual hand was Ax-0-Kxxxx-AKQxxx. Partner had a tough problem with the Ace-King in hearts, diamond AJxx, and 3 clubs. At IMP, 7D seems possible. At MP, 6NT seems possible. Pass is probably right, though.

 

Your hand reminds me a hand I opened 1D and (hastily) josephined to play 6 or 7 depending if pard had 2 our of 3 top trumps, my hand being

 

AK

Kxxxx

AKxxxx

-

 

There was no intervention but I am not sure it changes matters much.

 

I posted the topic on bbf (dunno how find it back though😡) on how to deal better because my Ds were not solid (xxx facing could result in a loser).

 

Here the Cs are solid and as you are driving anyway to 6, why not help patrner judge if he should bid 1 more?

 

As your hand is finally better than mine, maybe the jump to 6 is my hand it could be the minimum you should expect i.e. a reasonable chance of making but needing some extras in the opened suit and in trumps (2 majors stopped 1st round and strong 2-suiter but lacking top honors in both suits)?

 

What do you think? Not sure I'll see such hand again in my career though!

[billw55]

Was there any special rule in the game you were playing where you couldn't bid the same suit as opponents?

I was thinking that too. Wouldn't 2♥ be a forcing diamond raise? And leave us room to nose around for grand as well. Downside is ... that ops may be able to find a paying sac in 6M? Perhaps, but then again, they might anyway.

[kenrexford]

In defense of my sequence. First if my call happens to describe my hand as people would expect then it seems like the right way to bid the hand. 2 sequences cannot logically show the same hand.

 

Bidding the hand slowly has two risks. First is a jump to four hearts, which kills any intelligent auction. Second is that the auction involving a minor is always a hot mess even if not contested. If I have a call The Fairly describes my entire hand in one bid in a minor oriented auction I like to take it.

 

Exclusion Blackwood was not available. A splinter was an option but it gave up on the chance for an incorrect lead like a heart lead if the opponent's don't know what 6 diamonds shows. For that matter it is sometimes difficult to show a void after a splinter especially when they agreed Trump is a minor. The Splinter also does not really show the nature of the club suit. I thought about a blast to 5 hearts but that seemed to have the same problem of leading the opponents down the right path on defense. I also I'm not sure what five Hearts means which seems right because no one has suggested a natural 5 hearts void call.

 

The big picture bottom line is that the auction would be wildly different if I were supporting a major. Supporting a minor is such a messed up garbled cluster that blasting picture bids seemed ideal if possible.

[manudude03]

Sorry if this seems like a hijack, but do people play a double of Josephine as suggesting a sac? Seems to me like it should, but it's not an auction I've ever seen or discussed before.

 

I think it was pretty obvious the actual hand was going to be something that could be bid another way, but sometimes gadgets are overrated.

[billw55]

A splinter was an option but it gave up on the chance for an incorrect lead like a heart lead if the opponent's don't know what 6 diamonds shows.

I learned something from your post, but this bit concerns me. If your partner knows what 6♦ shows, the opponents should too. I certainly expect them to ask about such an unusual bid.

[barmar]

[/size]

I learned something from your post, but this bit concerns me. If your partner knows what 6♦ shows, the opponents should too. I certainly expect them to ask about such an unusual bid.

6♦ just showed a desire to play that contract, partner is expect to just pass. Anything else about the hand is only an inference. If partner has the ♥A, he can figure out that you must have heart shortness, but he doesn't have to tell the opponents that because it's based on his hand, not an agreement. If he doesn't have that card, the bid could be based on heart shortness or stiff A.

[kenrexford]

[/size]

I learned something from your post, but this bit concerns me. If your partner knows what 6♦ shows, the opponents should too. I certainly expect them to ask about such an unusual bid.

No one asked. The lead was a heart.