Can you bid this with certainty ?

[dsLawsd]

This is great dialogue with different thoughts depending on whether you are facing a regular partner or a new one.

 

I think inverted raise must promise no 4 card major and are forcing to game unless the next responder bid is 3 of the suit.

I see that Zia's card shows he likes 2♠as the forcing raise with raises of the minor showing something else. I am still studying that card.

 

Playing with a new partner inverted minors worth the effort over standard since at events 3 NT is the big target. Walsh had an extensive set of notes (and K-S is posted on the Bridge World web site) so that in the West Coast they became default in the past, but not so much now.

 

This shows that using many conventions un-discussed is a great drawback and so Regular partnerships need to put in the work.

 

I am glad to see this hand to add to my studies!

[TylerE]

Anyone else remember Goren? I don't vouch for the validity, but my parents would have done it:

 

1D 13+,four diamonds;

3C four clubs and 18+, Slam force if a fit can be found

3S five diamonds, four spades;

4NT blackwood

5D one ace;

7D on 36 points (minimum) between both hands, a five-five fit, and all four aces.

 

Enjoy going down when opener actually has xxxx AJx KQxxx K or QJxx AJx KQxxx x or any of a dozen other hands.

 

There is a reason no one under the age of 130 plays Goren.

[thepossum]

An auction from GIBs bidding table. North, East, West GIB, South Possum :)

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa4hkqdaj963cajt4&n=sk762haj4dkq852c3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2c(GF)p2dp4dp5dp5s(Cue Ace)p7dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Note It only seems to work if I bid GF 2C followed by 4D. If I bid game or small slam GiB stops, and if I initiate Blackwood too soon I cant get enough information and I stop in 6 :)

 

GiB North, South, East, West stops in 3NT South :)

 

Final version North Possum, South, East and West GiB :)

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa4hkqdaj963cajt4&n=sk762haj4dkq852c3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2d(Inverted)p4c(Splinter)d(KQ%20C)5c(Ace%20C%20Cue)p5h(Ace%20H%20Cue)p7dppp]266|200[/hv]

[fluff]

hi

 

1♦ 2♣

2♠ showing shape 3♦

3♥ (cue) 3♠​

4♣ cue 4♥ = KCB for ♦

5♦ 5♥ = K ?

5♠​ 7♦

[fluff]

hi

 

1♦ 2♣

2♠​ Shape 3♦

3♥ cue 3♠​ cue

4♣ cue 4♥ KCB

5♦ 2+Q 5♥ K?

5♠​ 7♦

 

I never liked inv. minors :)

[plypoin]

We play precision

 

1♦ (2+,12-15) - 2♦ (4+, limit+)

3♣ (12-13, unbalanced with 4+ diamond) - 4♣ (Fit D, 1st/2nd control, 3♦/NT would be T/P, and 3M would show 5♦ 4M GF hand)

4♦ (2-3 Top honor ) - 4♥ (1st/2nd control)

4♠ (1st/2nd control) - 4N (Keycard ?)

5♠ (two with Q) - 7♦ (??)

 

after 4♣, with no two top honor in diamond, opener should show control in other suit or sign off in 5♦

 

 

edit after zelandakh comment below

?? in 7D => not sure, i think i need more info

Edited September 8, 2019 by plypoin

[Cyberyeti]

We play precision

 

1♦ (2+,12-15) - 2♦ (4+, limit+)

3♣ (12-13, unbalanced with 4+ diamond) - 4♣ (Fit D, 1st/2nd control, 3♦/NT would be T/P, and 3M would show 5♦ 4M GF hand)

4♦ (2-3 Top honor ) - 4♥ (1st/2nd control)

4♠ (1st/2nd control) - 4N (Keycard ?)

5♠ (two with Q) - 7♦ (??)

 

after 4♣, with no two top honor in diamond, opener should show control in other suit or sign off in 5♦

 

And how does the auction differ if partner has Kxxx, AJ, KQxxx, xx ? or do you not treat that as unbalanced ?

[cleveritis]

I would say trivially ez to bid.

1D - 2D (forcing)

 

2S (should always show unbalanced hand with 2N for balanced hands)

 

3C - natural, 3N (natural)

 

Knowing now facing 5431 the only interesting card is the king of spades...

 

4C - Q, 4H - Q, 4S Q, 5D (I've done my bit), 5H (I have Kh) 5S (I have Ks) - 7D

[KingCovert]

Can you not be missing one of the top diamonds in this auction ?

 

What's different with the N hand as KQxx, AJx, Qxxxx, Q or the S hand AQ, KQ, J10xxx, AKxx

 

I followed up with partner on this hand, he says that he would bid 4NT over 4H in the provided auction. Followed by 5NT, which is also sufficient to find 7D. Just thought you should know.

[Cyberyeti]

I would say trivially ez to bid.

1D - 2D (forcing)

 

2S (should always show unbalanced hand with 2N for balanced hands)

 

3C - natural, 3N (natural)

 

Knowing now facing 5431 the only interesting card is the king of spades...

 

4C - Q, 4H - Q, 4S Q, 5D (I've done my bit), 5H (I have Kh) 5S (I have Ks) - 7D

 

I presume you treat 5422s as balanced which we don't

[cherdano]

Mike, I'd actually be curious on what you'd consider most important in inverted minor followups.

Imo, inverted minors with good subsequent sequences are the best I have seen, but my point was that most players who use inverted minors, in my experience, are so focused on showing or denying stoppers, especially in the majors, that they have problems bidding minor suit games or slams. Now, I am mostly an imp player, and so I would far rather be in a cold 5m making 5 than in a 65% 3N that makes 10 tricks or goes down, but at mps one's priorities change. Of course, I like to think that I can have it both ways, but my point is that simple inverted doesn't work well.

My own thinking is that showing shortness is more important than showing side suits is more important than showing stoppers. Obviously with more complexity you can do all of these but I think a simple system where the first bid by either player shows shortness, and you discuss stoppers only after both have denied shortness (and, obviously, if one player decides to care about stoppers, which would be rare) would be a huge improvement over standard.

[mikeh]

Mike, I'd actually be curious on what you'd consider most important in inverted minor followups.

 

My own thinking is that showing shortness is more important than showing side suits is more important than showing stoppers. Obviously with more complexity you can do all of these but I think a simple system where the first bid by either player shows shortness, and you discuss stoppers only after both have denied shortness (and, obviously, if one player decides to care about stoppers, which would be rare) would be a huge improvement over standard.

Hi Arend

 

In the two fairly good inverted structures I have played, the emphasis has been on opener limiting his hand in terms of accepting or rejecting a limit raise, while also describing hand type: thus 2N is always balanced and passable, while 3m is unbalanced and passable. With my recent switch, in one partnership, to 1D being 5+ or 4 only in a 4441 hand, we may, at imps, always bid 3D with minimums, unless we have a weak suit and chunky side 5332 hands, but we're still developing the system.

 

If opener has values to look for or force to game, we want to show the nature of the hand, if possible. So with game-try hands we will by definition be unbalanced, since we play 14-16 1N, and lesser values would reject a limit. So in the current structure we bid the cheapest non-2H step, and responder, if interested (which he won't be with a poor minimum limit) can ask, with step responses to show shortness.

 

In partial answer to your question, I consider this to be extremely useful: since our 1m openings are either flat 11-13 and would reject all invites, or are 17+ and would force to game, game-try hands will have some shape. We are still working out exactly how to handle 5422 hands: some 5422 hands would be 1N, if only because of rebid problems. 4=5 reds are a common problem for hands in the 1N range, since 1D 1S creates almost insoluble problems if one is 2=4=5=2 15 hcp, as an example.

 

So I think right now we play over 1C 2C 2D 2H, asking, 2S/N/3C show D/H/S stiff(void) and 3D/H/S are corresponding 5422 hands ill-suited for 1N.

 

With gf hands, opposite a limit raise, our first priority is to have responder limit his hand: so 2S over 2H (2H always shows gf for opener) is a limit raise.

 

If responder has a gf and opener is accepting an invite, slam is now at least possible. So if responder bids anything other than 2S, we are hunting.

 

2N would be a balanced, in context, gf minor raise, and opener can bid shortness (naturally, not coded) or bid 3m or 3N. 3m shows a decent 6 card suit with 6322 and 3N same suit but 7222: this enables responder to count some winners.

 

If responder is gf and unbalanced, over 2H he bids 3C/D/H with short other minor/short hearts/short spades.

 

Thereafter cuebidding and kickback.

 

So in another attempt to answer your question, I think we firstly limit the potential on the hand. Having done that, we stress shortness or balanced. If balanced, we don't care about stoppers. Sometimes xxx opposite xxx is enough.

 

Note that we don't, at all, show side-suits. We will never have a 4-4 major fit, where the 4-4 plays a trick better than the 5-4 minor. We may once in a while have a 4-4 side minor, but we are not likely to find that. Once in a blue moon, when the side suit is clubs, we may get a choice of slams 5N and a 6C offer to play, in an auction where both players can deduce that is what is going on, but it hasn't happened yet (tho, I've only been playing this method for 2 years, and played maybe 6 serious events in those 2 years).

 

I do agree that shape is more important than stoppers, and while we don't show side suits, we have even less regard for stoppers. I mean, seriously, who thinks that the way to win at imps (or even mps) is to get to 4m on a balanced 26 hcp? I want to be in 3N, and if I go down, I expect a push, or to beat them on other boards....if they did this knowingly, they'll probably beat me on other boards anyway.

[plypoin]

And how does the auction differ if partner has Kxxx, AJ, KQxxx, xx ? or do you not treat that as unbalanced ?

 

no difference in auction, but a great one in luck.

we treat 4252 as unbalanced because after 3/c, responder could bid 3M to show that he have 5m4M game forcing hand.

[Zelandakh]

no difference in auction, but a great one in luck.

You are going to bid a grand on the off chance partner has the hand you want? Without peeking?! Rather than guessing I suggest you take another look at your auction as there is a solution. After 5♠, 5NT would be a king ask and 6♣ is (by default) an SSA in clubs. In this case the SSA is useful as it can distinguish between ♣xx, ♣Qx, ♣x and ♣Kx. In the first case you can pass 6♦; in the second sign off in 6NT; and the other two allow the grand to be bid with confidence.

 

If you do not have the SSA in your arsenal then you cannot bid seven just because you can see both hands! It is precisely the difficulty of placing oneself in the seat of a player acting in a real game that makes double dummy bidding problems tricky. Being able to admit when one's bidding system or knowledge would not find the right decision is part of improving and understanding. And sometimes not reaching the right decision for a given hand is actually the right decision (on average).

 

I have spoken with CY privately and (I think) we both agree on the key decision that led to missing the grand. Funnily enough it is at precisely the same point in the auction as your improvement is to be found, albeit that he has more options due to a slightly more efficient auction to that point. The point here being that you bid 7♦ with essentially the same information available to you as the player in the OP when choosing to stay in 6. Mathematically it is probably fairly close whether to bid the grand slam or not at that point based on the available information but I think it is a few percentage points below the line. In other words, you made the right decision for this particular hand but you are showing a long-term loss. If your system and bidding decisions are leading you to be playing against the odds, it would normally be a good idea to improve. BBF is good at that for posters that have the ability to listen (read) and take in new ideas.

[Cyberyeti]

Zel nails this, we could have blasted 7 but didn't, this is why the topic has the title it does, can you bid it with certainty ?

 

Coming clean, the auction I posted is not exactly what we had, partner interpreted the 5♥ bid differently to me (I only play with him, he plays with many people, he used his method he plays with somebody else) and that caused us to have no chance to bid it.

 

It clearly wasn't easy, in the top team of the county match it was 3x6♦+1, 1x6N-1

[pescetom]

In this case the SSA is useful as it can distinguish between ♣xx, ♣Qx, ♣x and ♣Kx. In the first case you can pass 6♦; in the second sign off in 6NT; and the other two allow the grand to be bid with confidence.

 

If you do not have the SSA in your arsenal then you cannot bid seven just because you can see both hands!

 

I don't see that you need SSA to identify the latter two combinations of clubs, though. The Italian-style control-bid sequence I posted nails North with ♠Kxxx ♥Ax(x) ♦KQxx(x) and either ♣Kx or ♣x, which seemed enough to me at the time to call the grand with some certainty.

[TomSawyer4]

Enjoy going down when opener actually has xxxx AJx KQxxx K or QJxx AJx KQxxx x or any of a dozen other hands.

 

There is a reason no one under the age of 130 plays Goren.

 

xxxx AJx KQxxx K is not an opening hand, and therefore not an issue.

 

QJxx AJx KQxxx x is distinguished by the normal procedure of asking for Kings before a grand slam, which I skipped.

 

That leaves: xxxx AJ KQxxx Kx, which cannot be made, and is also not distinguished by any of the 2/1 methods I've seen presented in this forum.

 

AND, At the risk of starting a new forum discussion, I would argue that Goren is as full and complete as any modern system. It merely requires a little more card sense to play well.

[nullve]

2/1 fantasy:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa4hkqdaj963cajt4&n=sk762haj4dkq852c3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2cp2d(5+D3-C)p3dp3np4d(slam interest, no club control)p4n(RKC)p7dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Opener would bid the same way with ♣Kxx, of course, so 7♦ still not bid with certainty.

[Cyberyeti]

2/1 fantasy:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa4hkqdaj963cajt4&n=sk762haj4dkq852c3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2cp2d(5+D3-C)p3dp3np4d(slam interest, no club control)p4n(RKC)p7dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Opener would bid the same way with ♣Kxx, of course, so 7♦ still not bid with certainty.

 

Depends what the rest of his shape is, 4153 is still fine of course

[Cyberyeti]

xxxx AJx KQxxx K is not an opening hand, and therefore not an issue.

 

 

That is an opening bid to 99.999% of the population, it's an opening bid to me without ♣K, but I'm fairly extreme, NOBODY passes 13 counts these days whatever they are

[Cthulhu D]

I think it's a lot easier because we play an unbalanced diamond and otherwise have a similar auction, but it's tricky because you've got lots of choices depending on how north evaluates his hand (Does he have extras? Does he say the spade suit is 'good' or focus on the club shortness?). I legimtimately think this is a 'minimum' because the unbalanced 1D obviously promises a stiff or a void so my unbalanced 13 count is pretty close to a minimum.

 

If he has a minimum, he goes

 

1D-2S (Unbalanced Diamond - Inv+diamond raise or balanced GF with exactly 4 diamonds))

2NT - 3C (I have a minimum - shortness ask)

3NT - ?? (Short clubs - and now you're home free though our RKCB uses more space than Cyberyeti's so I think there is going to be a bunch of cue bidding before RKCB is bid.

 

But you're screwed if partner thinks he has extras and a the 4 card spade suit is good. Like say the J of S is in north hand for the sake of argument, then it goes

 

1D-2S

2NT-3S (Invitational+ - Extras with a 4 card good spade suit!) Now you get stuck where cyberyeti did.

 

I don't agree we have extras though. If you had the Q of spades with the K you have extras though but then I think you are OK even if you have the extra club?

[rhm]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa4hkqdaj963cajt4&n=sk762haj4dkq852c3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2dp2sp4dp5cp7dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

2♦ : inverted

2♠ : singleton club (over inverted we play step 1 (balanced or semi-balancd) next three steps show shortage from low side suit to high side suit

4♦ : Minorwood

5♣ : 2 keycards plus queen of diamonds

 

Simple and effective. (North is likely to hold 5 or more diamonds unless precisely 4-4-4-1)

 

Rainer Herrmann

[HardVector]

That is an opening bid to 99.999% of the population, it's an opening bid to me without ♣K, but I'm fairly extreme, NOBODY passes 13 counts these days whatever they are

I recently passed this: AQJ6♠ QJ♥ Q54♦ JT93♣ in second seat. The hand in question is nowhere near this bad, however, and is a clear open.

[rhm]

Enjoy going down when opener actually has xxxx AJx KQxxx K or QJxx AJx KQxxx x or any of a dozen other hands.

 

There is a reason no one under the age of 130 plays Goren.

Why are these hands a problem?

I would want to be in 7♦ on any day of the week.

The spade loser disappears on the heart ace.

There are at least 5 side suit top tricks plus 8 trump tricks.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa4hkqdaj963cajt4&n=sk762haj4dkq852c3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp2dp2sp4dp5cp7dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

2♦ : inverted

2♠ : singleton club (over inverted we play step 1 (balanced or semi-balancd) next three steps show shortage from low side suit to high side suit

4♦ : Minorwood

5♣ : 2 keycards plus queen of diamonds

 

Simple and effective. (North is likely to hold 5 or more diamonds unless precisely 4-4-4-1)

 

Rainer Herrmann

Is 2D gf? If not, seems to me that it may be more effective to have opener, at his first turn indicate whether he would accept a limit raise. That’s what we do (see my post early in the thread). There’s lots of room thereafter to show shape...indeed, both players can show shortness, depending on opener’s first rebid.

 

If 2D is gf, then your scheme seems very logical.