Any chance of getting to slam here?

[Cascade]

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=skj432hqj92dj52ck&s=saha8dakt863ca972]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

 

If you open 1♦ your LHO will overcall 2♣. Yes I know it must be a crappy overcall.

 

I guess West might bid after over opening bids.

 

There is no subsequent interference.

 

Honestly what auction would you expect from your partnership?

[mike777]

Must admit after starting with 1D I found it hard to come up with hand for opp that bids 2clubs and not 3clubs NV vs. VUL and we make 6D. They may have got me. Partner needs to be able to show stiff club somehow in auction.

 

Playing NFB, bidding 2s could be a disaster as we expect partner to pass 90% of the time.

 

Give LHO 7 clubs and K of hearts and that was a 3club bid.

 

Maybe:

1D=2C=X=P

3C=P=3S=P

5D=P=??

OR

1D=2C=X=P

3C=P=3S=P

4C=P=4H=P

5D=P=??

 

If p makes a neg X I play them for:

KQXXX

QJXX

XX

XX

 

 

down in 6D.

[Guest Jlall]

1D-(2C)-2S

3C-(P)-3H

4D-(P)-5D

6D

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I think I would have ended in 3NT, and to be honest, I would end

up in 3NT also, if there was no 2C overcall.

Partner should make a neg. double, afterall he holds both mayor.

 

In my partnership, the most likey auction would go

 

1D - (2C) - X - (Pass)

3D - (Pass) - 3S - (Pass)

3NT - (Pass) - ???

 

Now Pass is at least a sensible alternative.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[GijsH]

This hand enforces my theory that controls are the key to better bidding. South's hand is huge, because it contains so many controls. MIDMAC is a bidding system taking controls into account and our sequence would go:

 

1NT* (2♣) 2♠*

3♦ 3♥

4♣ 4♦

4♥ 4♠

4NT* 5♣*

6♦

 

1NT: 20+ points, any distribution and 5+ controls

2♠: 4+card, 8+ points, 2+ controls, GF

4♣: with so many controls (11) I try slam and can stop in 4NT when no fit

4NT: trump asking bid

5♣: no top honour

 

For more info on MIDMAC: see http://www.midmac.tk

 

Cascade: Talking about MIDMAC, you still owe me a contact with Jon Drabble?

[hotShot]

What you could do:

1♦ - 2♣ - 3♣ (1) - pass

4♦ (2) - pass - 4 NT - pass

5♥ (3) - pass - 6♦ ...

 

(1) strong, short in ♣

(2) long ♦, strong (few looser)

(3) 2/5 of 5 without the Q

 

We go:

2♦ (1) - 2♠ (2)

2 NT (3) - 3♣ (4)

4♦ (5) - 4♥ (6)

4♠ (7) - 4 NT (8)

5♦ (9) - 6♦ (10)

 

(1) 4-5 looser any distribution, 12+ hcp

(2) 8-11 hcp with a single

(3) relay, where's the single?

(4) ♣ single (partner will usually have 2 cards in every other suit)

(5) 6+ ♦, setting trum and RCKB based on ♦

(6) 0/3 of 5

(7) what about trump Q? (Implies that we have enough aces.)

(8) no trump Q

(9) but 2 of 3 kings and 3 card support might be good enough.

[Gerben42]

Wow a lot of points to react to here!

 

@Hotshot: Hard to see anything but a negative double from North after 1♦ (2♣) unless you are playing Fantunes system, and even then I still prefer a negative double and force to game afterwards.

 

Also with 2♦ you show a toy that appears to be working on this particular hand but seems to be a bad idea in general.

 

*****

 

Agree with Gijs that the South hand is HUGE, but the story about Midmac needs to be unraveled here.

 

Midmac is a SYSTEM

Your Control-count thingy is HAND EVALUATION

 

Just because you write your system in terms of your control count does not mean that Midmac is a system that takes the control count into account. It doesn't. I could be playing SAYC and still use my control count to evaluate my hands.

 

In short, there's system, which tells you what your partner will think your hand is worth, and there is hand evaluation, which allows you to decide which hand gives partner what information.

 

*****

As to the question:

I prefer double over a forcing 2♠ to get ♥ and in lesser extent ♦ in the picture. I'm not suggesting that is the best way to get to 6♦ on this particular hand, I think it needs some optimism from both players to get there.

 

Sorry that I did not give any solution but that's life...

[hotShot]

The problem of this hand is that both opener and responder are at the upper limit of their bids and the fit is in a minor. 3NT, 5m, 6m and 6NT are the considered targets with such hands. You often don't need extra strength to make 6m instead of 5m.

 

The question to raise is the strength of a negative double.

I prefer neg. doubles to be limited. This is helpful in competitive auctions to know when to stop.

Would you pass holding:[hv=s=skxxxhkjxxdxxcjxx]133|100|[/hv]

If you bid neg. dbl with this as well, the hand your partner is expecting, is weaker than that you actually hold. He won't be hoping on a ♦ fit and stop in 3NT.

So i think 3♣ is a better description of the hand. Maybe it's a little to weak for this bid but it is a matter of agreement.

[shoeless]

I dream about both of us having the moxie to do this as i don't think any bid is unreasonable - X(neg)-p-3d-p-3s(gf)-p-4c-p-5c-p-6d

 

However my money is on this auction - X(neg)-p-3d-p-3s(gf)-p-5d-p-p-p

[hotShot]

I dream about both of us having the moxie to do this as i don't think any bid is unreasonable - X(neg)-p-3d-p-3s(gf)-p-4c-p-5c-p-6d

 

However my money is on this auction - X(neg)-p-3d-p-3s(gf)-p-5d-p-p-p

Why would you avoid 3 NT?

Partner promisses the majors, you hold the minors. And if 3♠ showed support in ♦ the are likely to run in NT as well, if he does not have that support, you won't make 5♦ as well.

[Fluffy]

X-3♣

3♠-3NT

END

 

or

 

X-pass

 

but on a good day we might find

 

X-4♦

4♠-5♣

5♦-6♦