How to bid and reach slam

[newbdonkey]

North opens with 1♦

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqjhkq2dakj762ct6&n=sak97ha96d9854c75&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1dp]266|200[/hv]

 

What should South bid, and how should the subsequent bidding progress to reach a slam, or at least 5♦?

Please advise, SAYC preferred...

[sfi]

Slam is not so good if they cash their two club tricks, but game seems normal.

 

I would start with my game-forcing raise of diamonds, after which the partnership is likely to be bidding stoppers to try and find NT. For instance, if you play inverted minors:

 

1D - 2D (game forcing)

2H - 3D (good 3 card heart support, no black suit stopper)

3S - 4D (not even a weak club stopper)

5D

 

I'm not actually sure what the "standard" way to show a game-forcing minor raise is, but I would expect to have a similar sort of auction.

[Kaitlyn S]

North opens with 1♦

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqjhkq2dakj762ct6&n=sak97ha96d9854c75&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1dp]266|200[/hv]

 

What should South bid, and how should the subsequent bidding progress to reach a slam, or at least 5♦?

Please advise, SAYC preferred...

First, you don't want to be in slam with two fast club losers. Even if the opponent didn't cash them against your contract, they would have probably cashed them against 6D.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think inverted minors are part of SAYC - you are expected to make up a forcing bid. SAYC really doesn't work well for South's first response. Making up a 2C forcing response won't will not work out very well; but that is predictable (if partner hss clubs, the spade suit might be a problem.) I would bid where I lived; responding 1H, willing to play the 4-3 heart fit if partner insists on hearts.

 

North: 1D

South: 1H

North: 1S (if your partner's style is to ignore the 4-card spade suit and raise hearts on 3, you can't respond 1H, and you'd better have a forcing minor raise.)

South: 2C fourth-suit forcing and artificial

North: 2H showing 3-card support, having denied 4

South: 3D real diamonds, game forcing (otherwise would have jumped to 3D last turn even if 4SF isn't game forcing for you)

North: 3S last ditch effort to reach 3NT; can't be 5-6 when having showed three hearts

South: 5D (to play, do not want partner to pass 4D; some players think "game forcing" means they can bail in four of a minor if it appears things aren't working; if partner thinks 4D is stronger than 5D, I'll bid it so he'll bid six with a singleton club)

[newbdonkey]

First, you don't want to be in slam with two fast club losers. Even if the opponent didn't cash them against your contract, they would have probably cashed them against 6D.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think inverted minors are part of SAYC - you are expected to make up a forcing bid. SAYC really doesn't work well for South's first response. Making up a 2C forcing response won't will not work out very well; but that is predictable (if partner hss clubs, the spade suit might be a problem.) I would bid where I lived; responding 1H, willing to play the 4-3 heart fit if partner insists on hearts.

 

North: 1D

South: 1H

North: 1S (if your partner's style is to ignore the 4-card spade suit and raise hearts on 3, you can't respond 1H, and you'd better have a forcing minor raise.)

South: 2C fourth-suit forcing and artificial

North: 2H showing 3-card support, having denied 4

South: 3D real diamonds, game forcing (otherwise would have jumped to 3D last turn even if 4SF isn't game forcing for you)

North: 3S last ditch effort to reach 3NT; can't be 5-6 when having showed three hearts

South: 5D (to play, do not want partner to pass 4D; some players think "game forcing" means they can bail in four of a minor if it appears things aren't working; if partner thinks 4D is stronger than 5D, I'll bid it so he'll bid six with a singleton club)

@STI and @Kaitlyn, I totally missed the club losers while considering the slam. Thanks for the responses...

[newbdonkey]

First, you don't want to be in slam with two fast club losers. Even if the opponent didn't cash them against your contract, they would have probably cashed them against 6D.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think inverted minors are part of SAYC - you are expected to make up a forcing bid. SAYC really doesn't work well for South's first response. Making up a 2C forcing response won't will not work out very well; but that is predictable (if partner hss clubs, the spade suit might be a problem.) I would bid where I lived; responding 1H, willing to play the 4-3 heart fit if partner insists on hearts.

 

North: 1D

South: 1H

North: 1S (if your partner's style is to ignore the 4-card spade suit and raise hearts on 3, you can't respond 1H, and you'd better have a forcing minor raise.)

South: 2C fourth-suit forcing and artificial

North: 2H showing 3-card support, having denied 4

South: 3D real diamonds, game forcing (otherwise would have jumped to 3D last turn even if 4SF isn't game forcing for you)

North: 3S last ditch effort to reach 3NT; can't be 5-6 when having showed three hearts

South: 5D (to play, do not want partner to pass 4D; some players think "game forcing" means they can bail in four of a minor if it appears things aren't working; if partner thinks 4D is stronger than 5D, I'll bid it so he'll bid six with a singleton club)

@SFI and @Kaitlyn, I totally missed the club losers while considering the slam. Thanks for the responses...

[mycroft]

This is one of the most obvious holes in SAYC (as opposed to Standard American, which plays very well with a non-committee, newer-than-1975 set of agreements). There is no forcing minor raise. Good luck.

 

I would probably start, given that restriction, with[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2cp2np3d(GF%2C%20even%20in%20SA)]133|100[/hv] and now the problem is how to stay out of 3NT. Having said that, faking the club suit as a forcing bid means they might not lead one!

 

These are nasty hands for any system. My auction with my regular partner would be 1NT-3NT (weak NT). "Standard" auction around here would be 1♦-2♦ (NAT GF); 2NT (majors stopped)-3NT.

[bravejason]

Is there no pre-specified mechanism within SAYC that lets a partnership bid to game in a minor suit? Or is the partnership reduced to "finding" bids and hoping they each partner realizes there is a minor suit game?

[mycroft]

Direct quote from the source: "There is no forcing minor-suit raise".

 

They do play strong jump shifts (GF, slam try), so you could fake a J/S and go back to diamonds. Good luck guessing which suit to J/S in, knowing that partner will probably correct even 6♦ to 6♥ (with the majors switched, on this hand).

 

SAYC was, as I said in another thread, a camel (a horse built by committee). It was designed to be a system that most non-novice tournament players could play, in 1975 when it was built. So they got negative doubles, because those had percolated down from Meckwell by then (but only through 2♠!); but not inverted minors. Of course, the world had moved on by then from jump raises=GF (which meant that you had to fake the limit raises, instead); but hadn't yet "universally" come to the single raise=Limit+ (never mind single raise=GF) solution; so so sorry, no invm for you (even in the 2006 revision).

 

As I said, a reasonably organized Standard American framework can be very very effective. Yellow Card is not that.

[gordontd]

Life might be easier if North hadn't opened.

[ggwhiz]

Life might be easier if North hadn't opened.

 

I'm one of the few that would not open the north hand.

 

No answers here in the SAYC framework but if you have a regular pard this is a good advertisement for tweaking/adding to your tool box.

 

Meanwhile at mp's I want to be in 4♠ and 3,000 pages of system bidding notes won't solve that one!

[Vampyr]

SAYC was, as I said in another thread, a camel (a horse built by committee). It was designed to be a system that most non-novice tournament players could play, in 1975 when it was built.

 

Well, Yellow Card events were not intended for experienced players.

[silvr bull]

I'm one of the few that would not open the north hand.

We are in the minority. :( I see players opening 11 and even 10 point hands, and I can only hope it is an over bidding craze that will eventually burn out. It seems that everyone these days asks how high they can bid in most situations. When both partners are bidding their hands to the "max", disappointment often results. My approach is to ask instead how LITTLE I can bid without embarrassing myself. By choosing to bid less in questionable situations (like this OP for example), I can limit my hand early, and then bid more later if appropriate. My partners are also happy that they can depend on most of my bids to have solid values.

 

I prefer to open 12-14 NT and I would easily pass the OP hand. Add another J (AKxx Axx xxxx Jx for example), and I would still pass if playing 15-17 NT, but I would open 1NT playing 12-14. The key difference is that opening a 12-14 1NT with my example is a limited bid, even if it is a near minimum. Opening 1 of any suit, however, is not limited until opener can rebid 1NT. When opps take any action, it can be difficult to make that 1NT rebid, and partner will imagine that my unlimited hand has more strength than it does. Limiting a hand early in the bidding pays off with significant dividends later in this situation, and in others where the hand is strong enough that it does not need to be limited so soon. :)

[helene_t]

Responding 2c with the South hand is normal. you normally want to reach 3n played by partner while psyching them out of the club lead. However it requires a subsequent 3d to be forcing which it might not be in SAYC

 

It goes

1d 2c

2d 3d

3H 4H

5c 5d

What an awful auction. North should not have opened. Playing a different system maybe, but in sayc he doesn't have the strength for a 2n rebid so has to bid diamonds twice. South suggest the 4-3 fit in hearts but north knows it's a 3-3 fit and suggest 5c just in case south has six clubs.

 

If the second 3d bid is not forcing you should probably go for Kaitlyn's auction.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 regarding opening the hand ..., a style matter, you do have the controls, and the defence,

and you dont have a rebid problem, you can either rebid 1S (or 1NT, upgrading the hand to

12-14 bal is not the worst you can do)

I would not open myself, but opening this hand is fine

 

#2 usually you will end up in 3NT, goes down, if they cash their tricks with the opening lead.

 

#3 without a forcing raise, your best bet is 3NT, you are a bit heavy, but this is the price you

pay for playing few agreements.

An auction 1D - 3NT will quite often fetch a lead in a major, and you will be fine.

Leading clubs risks, leading responders suit.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

Life might be easier if North hadn't opened.

Yes. South opens 1NT, East doubles Stayman for the lead, and now we know to avoid 3NT.

[mycroft]

Wow. Playing K/S, anyway, I thought *I* was more conservative than the world (at least with non-major openers). "Three Quick Tricks is an opener." Has been since 1930.

 

Okay, my judgment could be bad (which is why I don't use it here - I Follow Rules), but not opening A, AK in the majors and not pancake seems massively -EV. The fact that it works on this hand - counting on the opponents to be helpful, no less - doesn't change my mind.

[rmnka447]

First, you don't want to be in slam with two fast club losers. Even if the opponent didn't cash them against your contract, they would have probably cashed them against 6D.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think inverted minors are part of SAYC - you are expected to make up a forcing bid. SAYC really doesn't work well for South's first response. Making up a 2C forcing response won't will not work out very well; but that is predictable (if partner hss clubs, the spade suit might be a problem.) I would bid where I lived; responding 1H, willing to play the 4-3 heart fit if partner insists on hearts.

 

North: 1D

South: 1H

North: 1S (if your partner's style is to ignore the 4-card spade suit and raise hearts on 3, you can't respond 1H, and you'd better have a forcing minor raise.)

South: 2C fourth-suit forcing and artificial

North: 2H showing 3-card support, having denied 4

South: 3D real diamonds, game forcing (otherwise would have jumped to 3D last turn even if 4SF isn't game forcing for you)

North: 3S last ditch effort to reach 3NT; can't be 5-6 when having showed three hearts

South: 5D (to play, do not want partner to pass 4D; some players think "game forcing" means they can bail in four of a minor if it appears things aren't working; if partner thinks 4D is stronger than 5D, I'll bid it so he'll bid six with a singleton club)

 

I would open the North hand as it has 3 QTs. Some experts might not, but that's a matter of style. (Like mycroft, I'll admit to being a K/S player and under the influence of Edgar Kaplan's thoughts on bidding.)

 

I'm very much in agreement with Kaitlyn's sequence here. 1 ♥ seems much less a lie than manufacturing a 2 ♣ (presumably natural) response.

 

I also agree that SAYC has problems with no forcing minor raise. But SAYC is a somewhat simplified bidding system aimed towards newer players who would have some issues learning systems with much more specific and detailed bidding sequences and tools. The important thing is to help them learn the basics principles of good bidding down pat. If they can do that, then in the long run, they'll be better off and able to graduate to a more involved bidding system.

 

With that in mind, I think one of the key principles the OP can take away is in Kaitlyn's comment about South's 3 ♦ bid. The principle is that every time you force your partner to bid again you add value to your hand. So after opener's 1 ♠ rebid, a 2 ♦ responder rebid is a signoff showing 6-9 and diamonds and a 3 ♦ responder rebid shows 10-12 invitational with diamonds. So by using a 2 ♣ bid to force again, then showing the ♦ fit, responder is showing at least an opening bid with a diamond fit. Note that responder's hand is still unlimited. In SAYC, the 2 ♣ bid in this sequence isn't a game force per se, but a one round force. So after opener's 2 ♥ rebid over 2 ♣ (showing 3 ♥) with an invitational hand with 5 hearts, responder could have raised to 3 ♥ to invite game.

[Kaitlyn S]

Meanwhile at mp's I want to be in 4♠ and 3,000 pages of system bidding notes won't solve that one!

Oh, if these two hands were in the ACBL Bulletin's Bidding Box column, you could be reasonably certain that the Bridge Bulletin auction would get to 4S!

[mikestar13]

Oh, if these two hands were in the ACBL Bulletin's Bidding Box column, you could be reasonably certain that the Bridge Bulletin auction would get to 4S!

 

I would hope not (though Kaitlyn S is probably right).. While the best (or only making) game might be a 4-2 major fit, it's rare. Maybe a few experts with very refined judgment might find it when its right (and have the play skills to handle the hand), but at least 98% of us will do better never trying to find 4-2 fits.And even the 2% won't have it in their system notes. If the Bidding Box is aimed at even very good players who still have things to learn, they will be teaching the wrong lesson.

 

Knowing when to try a 4-3 fit at the game level is not an easy judgment call, but the decision is far more frequent than the 4-2 decision, and less difficult.

 

I remember playing 4M on a 4-2 fit deliberately once in my life--my judgement happened to be correct as it was the only making game, but I couldn't make it and the -200 when i lost control of the hand was a very round zero when we had +130 available in either minor, for above average.

[Vampyr]

I would hope not (though Kaitlyn S is probably right).. While the best (or only making) game might be a 4-2 major fit, it's rare. Maybe a few experts with very refined judgment might find it when its right (and have the play skills to handle the hand), but at least 98% of us will do better never trying to find 4-2 fits.And even the 2% won't have it in their system notes. If the Bidding Box is aimed at even very good players who still have things to learn, they will be teaching the wrong lesson.

 

Knowing when to try a 4-3 fit at the game level is not an easy judgment call, but the decision is far more frequent than the 4-2 decision, and less difficult.

 

I remember playing 4M on a 4-2 fit deliberately once in my life--my judgement happened to be correct as it was the only making game, but I couldn't make it and the -200 when i lost control of the hand was a very round zero when we had +130 available in either minor, for above average.

 

Bidding a slam on a known 4-2 fit used to be a MSC special. Probably still is.

[helene_t]

I recall two cases reported in bridge magazines where a 4-2 fit was deliberately chosen. one was unsurpringly a strong clob auction where the captain eventually knew everything and could see that the only good slam was a4-2 fit. Iit took place in Curaçao. the other was from the cap gemini invitational where a polish pair deciided for a 4-2 4S contract in some awkward contested auction.