No Room

[lamford]

[hv=pc=n&n=sakj87543h32d5ca8&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1c(can%20be%20short)1hd(4%2B%20spades)4hpp]133|200[/hv]

IMPs. Your go.

 

You are playing transfer responses to 1C, and 1S on the first round would have shown clubs. And what do people think of playing 4C/4D by North on the first round as slam-tries in hearts/spades respectively?

[Jinksy]

What would other bids have meant over W's 1♥? Did N eg have the option to bid something rather than X with a distributional 2-suiter?

[lamford]

What would other bids have meant over W's 1♥? Did N eg have the option to bid something rather than X with a distributional 2-suiter?

2S would have been fit (2C and 2D natural and forcing). Four Spades would have been to play. Three of anything would also be fit. 4C and 4D were undiscussed (but hearts and spades respectively over a pass).

[Jinksy]

Is there an agreed meaning for 4N here?

 

Unless it's RKCB for spades, I'm bidding 5♠. New suits at the 5 level might be taken as natural, and 5♥ is presumably either showing/consistent with a control in the suit. We don't have quite enough to blast 6, so I'll hope that P can read such as xx x Axxx KQJxxx as a good enough holding.

 

What would a 2-level bid offer by way of club support, btw? It seems odd to play FNJs opposite a short club.

[MrAce]

5♠, denying ♥ control.

[P_Marlowe]

I go with 4S.

 

If you cannot stand missing slam, bid 5S.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[manudude03]

If 4S the first round would have been to play, then it stands to reason that 4S now would show a better hand than 4S the first time so I bid 4S and partner can move with a good hand that had been frozen out.

[Zelandakh]

If 4S the first round would have been to play, then it stands to reason that 4S now would show a better hand than 4S the first time so I bid 4S and partner can move with a good hand that had been frozen out.

What would you do now with a hand where you really wanted to invite if the opps did not compete further but are willing to upgrade now that they have shown a heart fit?

[helene_t]

If 4S the first round would have been to play, then it stands to reason that 4S now would show a better hand than 4S the first time so I bid 4S and partner can move with a good hand that had been frozen out.

I am not sure about this. A hand with a good six card suit or a bad seven card suit would not commit to 4♠ initially but would do so now under pressure. I don't think it necessarily shows a stronger hand.

 

Anyway, it would be nice to have other ways to show spades than just the lame double.

[Phil]

Over 1H, we play 2D is either weak or GF with 6+ spades which takes some pressure off the x.

[GrahamJson]

I don't like negative doubles on very distributional hands. The last thing you want here is for partner to pass for penalties. I prefer either 1S or 2S, whichever you play as forcing. You can then follow up with 4S, which should show a better hand than a direct 4S. As the bidding went I would bid 4S. Yes, you could be missing six, but you don't want to be one off in five. Again, partner should realise that you are strong as you did not bid 4S on the first round.

[miamijd]

Do you play that 1S has some sort of conventional meaning? Otherwise, why a negative X and not a normal 1S call?

[Caitlynne]

I am trying to understand how you could Dbl initially rather than bid spades. (If you are playing something unusual like 1S is non-forcing or transfers by responder after 1 level overcalls, you MUST disclose that if you want reasonable feedback - so I assume not.)

 

The reason you have a huge problem - and have created considerable opportunity to confuse partner no matter what you do now - is because you did not bid 1S. Sometimes (and usually) there is no way to intelligently recover from a missed bid.

 

I have no idea what to do (i.e., who can make what) and you can get no help from partner since you missed your 1S bid. You will have to guess. I know I am bidding because I have a very fine EIGHT card spade suit and there is a special name for my very fine eight card suits - "Trumps."

 

I am going to guess that it is not unreasonable to hope that partner has the Ace of diamonds and the King of clubs and a couple of spades. If so, there should be reasonable play for a spade slam if partner has the heart suit controlled.

 

There is a way to ask for that: 5S. And that is my bid.

 

But I am guessing. And that is all that anyone can do now. There is no "right" or "percentage" answer to your question after failing to bid spades at your first turn.

[hoofie]

The double was not a negative double it showed 4 plus spades (1s would have showen clubs)

 

Whilst 1S then 4S would have shown a better hand than 4S in an uncontested auction that did not apply here as 4S could now be a stretched bid on an originally invitational hand

 

Does that change anyone's' view?

[ggwhiz]

The mainstream approach is to bid 1♠ followed by setting them as trumps and might require a 5♥ bid next to get the slammish try across but that obviously isn't part of your system and it's much too tough for responders to figure out what that system is. For example, my partnership doesn't open 1♣ on flat 11's but yours?

 

How about a 4♥ bid instead of the double? If 2♦ is an either or, suits OR strength might as well go all in on this bid too say, weak clubs or slammish spades. Continuations to be worked out before this hand comes up again in 2040.

[Jinksy]

The reason you have a huge problem - and have created considerable opportunity to confuse partner no matter what you do now - is because you did not bid 1S. Sometimes (and usually) there is no way to intelligently recover from a missed bid.

 

I think we can be charitable enough to assume that from X being '4+ spades' and 1♠ not having been bid, that 1♠ would not have been consistent with this hand.

 

Anyway, how would having shown a 5th spade have solved the problem? He'd still have a massive single suiter that would still have excellent play for slam opposite xx x Axxx KQxxxx, and he'd almost certainly have the same rebid problem.

[rmnka447]

It certainly is a tough rebid problem. I think the choices are 4 ♠ or 5 ♠.

 

To play off Jinksy's post a tad, if opener has something like x xx Axxx KQJxxx, slam certainly isn't there. And with something like x Kx Kxxx KQJxxx, 5 ♠ is probably down and 4 may not make if ♠ lie badly. (If you think opener only has 1 ♥ because West overcalled and East jumped to 4 -- it could be that West decided to overcall on ♥ AKQJ and East has 5, or, West made a normal overcall with 5 but East had a very distributional hand like x Qxxx Axxxxxx x and rightly decided to preempt.)

 

OP didn't indicate whether it was IMPs or MPs.

 

I think I'm going to give a split decision based on the method of scoring. At IMPs, I'm bidding 4 ♠ because I'm not sure the frequency of getting to slam is worth potentially risking a vulnerable game swing. At MPs, I'd probably opt for 5 ♠ feeling that 5 ♠ ought to make often enough that I won't get a zero, but that we may find the slam for most of the marbles.

[lamford]

Over 1H, we play 2D is either weak or GF with 6+ spades which takes some pressure off the x.

An interesting gadget, Phil, which I will discuss with my regular partner. Thanks.

[Phil]

An interesting gadget, Phil, which I will discuss with my regular partner. Thanks.

 

Hi Paul - Here's the entire structure (which you may or may not need) :

 

x = 4-5 S

1S = 0-3 S - all notrumpy hands

1N/2C = transfers to minors

2D = as stated - weak or GF with spades

2H = BOTH minors

2S = exactly invitational with 6

2N/3C/3H = transfers / preemptish

3D = undefined.

[Jinksy]

Hi Paul - Here's the entire structure (which you may or may not need) :

 

x = 4-5 S

1S = 0-3 S - all notrumpy hands

1N/2C = transfers to minors

2D = as stated - weak or GF with spades

2H = BOTH minors

2S = exactly invitational with 6

2N/3C/3H = transfers / preemptish

3D = undefined.

 

Is that after either 1m opening and a 1♥ overcall, or do you something different after a 1♦ opening?

[jogs]

[hv=pc=n&n=sakj87543h32d5ca8&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1c(can%20be%20short)1hd(4%2B%20spades)4hpp]133|200[/hv]

IMPs. Your go.

 

You are playing transfer responses to 1C, and 1S on the first round would have shown clubs. And what do people think of playing 4C/4D by North on the first round as slam-tries in hearts/spades respectively?

Maybe in a contested auction, 1♠ should show spades. Else why didn't you start with 2♥? Is there any way to show spades?

[Zelandakh]

Maybe in a contested auction, 1♠ should show spades.

You realise that transfers in competition are one of the fastest growing methods in the international game, right?

[aguahombre]

The double was not a negative double it showed 4 plus spades (1s would have showen clubs)

 

Whilst 1S then 4S would have shown a better hand than 4S in an uncontested auction that did not apply here as 4S could now be a stretched bid on an originally invitational hand

 

Does that change anyone's' view?

It probably won't change the view of the posters of items 11, 12, and 13. They didn't read the OP response structure as presented the first time. No reason they would read yours.

[Zelandakh]

Just for reference, I thought it might be good to post Ben's Equality structure for 1m - (1♥). He also uses a couple of additional responses to take pressure off of the double:-

 

1m - (1♥)

==

X = 4+ spades

1♠ = 5+ om; or a balanced hand unsuitable for nat 1/3NT bid

1NT = natural, NF

2♣ = 4+ spades

2♦ = 5+ spades

2♥ = constructive raise

2♠ = fit jump

2NT = very preemptive or game force

3♣ = preemptive but better than 2NT

3♦, 3♠ = fit jumps

3♥ = stopper ask

3NT = To play

--

 

I quite like Phil's concept, where 2♦ is weak or GF and 2♠ natural and invitational, as that fits well with how I think of this type of structure. I think the most important part of a full transfer scheme is that it fits together in a logical and integrated way with as few exceptions as possible though. It seems clear from the experiences of those playing these methods that having only double for the spade hands is too little though, with 2♦ being an obvious candidate call for taking some of the excess load.

[jogs]

You realise that transfers in competition are one of the fastest growing methods in the international game, right?

 

And I don't like it. How does one show spades?