Your bid.

[xavierf]

[hv=pc=n&s=s6haqjt764daj98c6&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1c(2%2B)1s2h(1%20round%20forcing)p3np]133|200[/hv]

IMP's

1C can be 2 if exactly 4432, with 44m we open 1C, 15-17 1NT.

Do you bid something, and if so what do you bid?

spots approximately

[wank]

partner has shown 18-19 bal or something off shape with somewhat less. slam is obviously likely and 7 possible. the only useful move you can make is 4S.

[Tramticket]

partner has shown 18-19 bal or something off shape with somewhat less. slam is obviously likely and 7 possible. the only useful move you can make is 4S.

 

I agree with all of this. I would also probably bid 4♠, which at least tells partner that we are considering slams.

 

But I have no idea what partner's continuations will mean - and in particular how to find out about the king of hearts. I'm guessing

- 4NT - natural to play

- 5♣ - natural 5/6 card club suit?

- 5♦ - cue bid (in support of hearts?

- 5♥ - agreeing hearts?

 

Maybe we should bid 5♥ over 3NT?

[xavierf]

4NT would be an invite,

5C would be natural.

 

But I was curious what the preference was?

4S?

5H,

or something else?

[MrAce]

4NT would be an invite,

5C would be natural.

 

But I was curious what the preference was?

4S?

5H,

or something else?

 

4♠

[Winstonm]

I don't think it is realistic to think enough information can be garnered to confidently bid a grand slam - how do you let partner know diamond honors are critical cards? - so I am more inclined to simply blast 6H.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=s6haqjt764daj98c6&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1c(2%2B)1s2h(1%20round%20forcing)p3np]133|200|

IMP's

1C can be 2 if exactly 4432, with 44m we open 1C, 15-17 1NT.

Do you bid something, and if so what do you bid?

spots approximately[/hv]

Partner probably has a good hand with a ♠ stop and a long strong ♣ suit.

I rank

1. 4♦ = NAT. S/T. Suit or feature.
2. 6♥ = NAT. Landy S/T. Agree with WinstonM that this is the practical bid.
3. 4♠ = ART. But difficult to imagine what this shows or what it will accomplish.

[wank]

Partner probably has a good hand with a ♠ stop and a long strong ♣ suit.

I rank

1. 4♦ = NAT. S/T. Suit or feature.
2. 6♥ = NAT. Landy S/T. Agree with WinstonM that this is the practical bid.
3. 4♠ = ART. But difficult to imagine what this shows or what it will accomplish.

 

4S for sure shows a slam try in hearts. if you had a slam try in clubs you'd bid er....clubs.

[The_Badger]

Although I like the 4♠ bid, I personally prefer 4♦. It's 99% certain that it's going to end in a ♥ contract at some level, and whilst you have a fair idea what partner's hand is, he has no idea that you have a semi solid suit and two singletons.

 

You're the one that wants to know what controls he has, and whether he has anything in ♦ to fill the gaps, or a ♣ suit in his own hand to get rid of the ♦ losers. You can always bid 4♠ next but I prefer 4NT after he has given preference to ♥, as is the most likely scenario (not guaranteed but likely).

 

Whilst 4♠ is a scientific bid, partner is then posed the two conundrums 1) have you a void, singleton or ace as the control, and, 2) whether RKCB or a cuebidding continuation is best? The first thing you want to know is whether he has those two aces and the ♥K.

 

A 4♦ bid, in my view lets you take control of the bidding.

[msjennifer]

My bid is a 'natural' 4D.Bidding a minor at 4 level over a passable 3 NT bid does show a strong heart suit and also a diamond suit and slammish hand

[Cyberyeti]

My bid is a 'natural' 4D.Bidding a minor at 4 level over a passable 3 NT bid does show a strong heart suit and also a diamond suit and slammish hand

 

No it doesn't, what do you bid with void, Qxxxxx, AKQJxx, x, the heart suit need not be strong although often is

[fourdad]

4♣ as gerber over the last NT bid. Obviously shows slam interest. At 6♥ the lead will come through the spade stop and I want to know controls.

 

I pd has diamonds stopped (as is implied with the 3NT bid), then it is likely that the K♥ is onside for the overcall to make sense.

[Cyberyeti]

4♣ as gerber over the last NT bid. Obviously shows slam interest. At 6♥ the lead will come through the spade stop and I want to know controls.

 

I pd has diamonds stopped (as is implied with the 3NT bid), then it is likely that the K♥ is onside for the overcall to make sense.

 

4♣ is NEVER EVER gerber in this sequence, how do you agree clubs with 4-6♥/4-6♣ ?

[eagles123]

4♣ is NEVER EVER gerber in this sequence, how do you agree clubs with 4-6♥/4-6♣ ?

 

come on dude, 4♣ is ALWAYS gerber, you really should know that by now :rolleyes:

[Zelandakh]

4♣ is NEVER EVER gerber in this sequence, how do you agree clubs with 4-6♥/4-6♣ ?

Well obviously you don't use an additional card (Stop or Alert) as you would when bidding it to ask for aces - like duh!

[Tramticket]

There is discussion on another site of the worst convention ever. I can't believe that Gerber is not the run-away leader.

[Cyberyeti]

There is discussion on another site of the worst convention ever. I can't believe that Gerber is not the run-away leader.

 

It's way behind ghestem, a convention that even its inventor has forgotten

[Zelandakh]

There is discussion on another site of the worst convention ever. I can't believe that Gerber is not the run-away leader.

Gerber was a useful convention back in the day. Even in modern bidding it has its uses - see Baze for example. I also remember my first team mates being a French pair that used Gerber as their primary slam tool and were surprisingly successful in the slam zone. There is certainly (much) worse out there!

 

Just thinking back to my learning days, the old, pre-Michaels/Ghestem (strong) cue bid is surely worse. I also had an English teacher at that time who played Roman Blackwood - after some consideration I didn't consider it much of an upgrade. ;) I suspect the worst convention I have played though, is one my first partner insisted on and called the 2♣ Asking Range. This consisted of a 2♣ response over a 1♠, 1♥ or 1♦ opening bid asking for Opener's strength range in steps. No other system changes - just that. It just happened to make some hands unbiddable for no gain. Luckily I managed to come up with a compromise to solve the "problem" the convention was designed to fix so we got to dump it fairly quickly.

[miamijd]

Why does everyone think 3NT shows such a strong hand? 2NT wouldn't be forcing here, so 3NT doesn't guarantee extras beyond a hand worth forcing game.

 

It seems to me that partner is likely to have either (1) a spade stop and a long running club suit or (2) a semi-balanced hand with a stiff heart and 15-17 or so:

 

1. Kx xx xx AKQJxxx

or

2. KQxx x Kxx AKJxx

 

With a really good hand, I would hope partner would start with 2S (unspecified good hand) and then clarify things with his next bid (NT, H, or C). Otherwise, you have no way to distinguish a 15 HCP hand from a 19 HCP hand at opener's second turn.

 

With partner opening 1C, it's not likely you belong in diamonds (he would generally open 1D with four of them, and if he has reverse strength, he probably would bid 3D, not 3NT). So the question is whether he can cover 4 losers in a H contract. That means Ac, KQd, and either (x) As or (y) a spade stop and the Kh. Way too much specific stuff to ask for.

 

So maybe I'm daft here, but it seems to me like the prudent course is a 4H signoff.

[Cyberyeti]

Why does everyone think 3NT shows such a strong hand? 2NT wouldn't be forcing here, so 3NT doesn't guarantee extras beyond a hand worth forcing game.

 

It seems to me that partner is likely to have either (1) a spade stop and a long running club suit or (2) a semi-balanced hand with a stiff heart and 15-17 or so:

 

1. Kx xx xx AKQJxxx

or

2. KQxx x Kxx AKJxx

 

With a really good hand, I would hope partner would start with 2S (unspecified good hand) and then clarify things with his next bid (NT, H, or C). Otherwise, you have no way to distinguish a 15 HCP hand from a 19 HCP hand at opener's second turn.

 

With partner opening 1C, it's not likely you belong in diamonds (he would generally open 1D with four of them, and if he has reverse strength, he probably would bid 3D, not 3NT). So the question is whether he can cover 4 losers in a H contract. That means Ac, KQd, and either (x) As or (y) a spade stop and the Kh. Way too much specific stuff to ask for.

 

So maybe I'm daft here, but it seems to me like the prudent course is a 4H signoff.

 

Part of the problem here is that partner can have something he evaluates as really poor that is in fact gold dust QJ9x, K, KQ, A and 5 other clubs maybe with some minor honours for example.

 

I think partner can also be 18-19 bal or semi bal with 1-2 hearts.

[miamijd]

Part of the problem here is that partner can have something he evaluates as really poor that is in fact gold dust QJ9x, K, KQ, A and 5 other clubs maybe with some minor honours for example.

 

I think partner can also be 18-19 bal or semi bal with 1-2 hearts.

 

If partner has 18-19, then why rush to bid 3NT? Then there is no way to separate the 15-count with a stiff h from a 19 count with Kx (not to mention Kx of spades running clubs and out). Why not just bid 2S with that hand initially?

[msjennifer]

No it doesn't, what do you bid with void, Qxxxxx, AKQJxx, x, the heart suit need not be strong although often is

I cannot give answer to the hand which you describe .I am giving my bid ,as I was taught, for the hand given specifically in this post,Lastly,I agree to disagree with you.

[Zelandakh]

I cannot give answer to the hand which you describe .I am giving my bid ,as I was taught, for the hand given specifically in this post,Lastly,I agree to disagree with you.

If you think about it a little more, you might come up with a way for your preferred hand type (slammy with good suits) and CY's construction (choice of game) to coexist within the same rebid. Just because you were taught to play a certain way does not mean you should consider that the only way. It is always good to look for possibilities for improvement.

[msjennifer]

If you think about it a little more, you might come up with a way for your preferred hand type (slammy with good suits) and CY's construction (choice of game) to coexist within the same rebid. Just because you were taught to play a certain way does not mean you should consider that the only way. It is always good to look for possibilities for improvement.

Thanks a lot for your kind suggestions ,uncle Zealandakh.As a matter of fact,we do have different hand treatments for distributional hands after an intervention .However space limitations forbid me from discussing them right now.Perhaps,some other occasion!

[MrAce]

Thanks a lot for your kind suggestions ,uncle Zealandakh.

 

 

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif