Slammish hand

[whereagles]

Imps, sayc, all vuln, expert pard. You hold:

 

♠ AKQxx

♥ Ax

♦ xx

♣ Qxxx

 

Pard you

1♦ 1♠

2NT 3♣

3♠ 4♥

5♠

 

3♣ was natural, 5-4 and a game force.

5♠ asks for help in trumps (surprising, isn't it? :rolleyes:)

 

So, what do you bid now?

[mike777]

Thank goodness Partner did not bid 4nt RKC over 4h and has bid 5s.

 

By being able to bid a natural 3clubs, I assume we would not bid 3c with jxxx suit. I assume we would not cuebid 4h with a game only hand...So with:

XXX

KX

AKXXX

AKJ

 

with 4 clubs partner would bid 4c and then cuebid, etc. in clubs and then could bid 5nt asking us to bid 7 with running spades, with above hand or similar they would rkc in spades so what the heck is p hand..hmm

 

 

As a side note, another option is to play 3c as game only checkback and 3d as slam interest checkback or even 3clubs as a baron type bid.

[Chamaco]

The way I play, 5S asks to bid a small slam holding 2 top honors in trumps.

 

Pard is not worried about anything else.

With only 2 top honors I'd just bid 6S.

Here I hold 3 top honors, so I will cue my club Q, showing 3 keycards and a feature: I bid 6C.

 

However, it is a matter of agreement whether we should instead respond in steps showing: pass = 0-1 top honors in trumps; first step = 2 top honors+ some extras (features) ; second step = 3 top honors; 6 of the agred major = exactly 2 top honors, no extras.

[pbleighton]

6S. 34-35 hcp and a balanced versus a semibalanced hand, the grand is unlikely.

 

Peter

[luke warm]

i'd be surprised if partner isn't 4162 or 4261... 7S

[pbleighton]

"i'd be surprised if partner isn't 4162 or 4261... 7S"

 

After 1D-1S-2NT in SAYC? What am I missing?

 

Peter

[luke warm]

you missed nothing, i did :rolleyes:

[Double !]

7 shovels ♠

 

Partner seems to be concerned only about trump losers. I'll pay to a bad spade break (again)

[Fluffy]

I would assume that 2NT is game forcing, 3♣ asks about mayorholdings, 3♠ shows 3+♠ and less than 4 ♥.

 

I would bid 6♦, 6♠ is not enough, and 6♥ might suggest ♥AK, 6♣ may suggest 2 of the top honnors only, so 6♦ should be the right bid.

[mike777]

I would assume that 2NT is game forcing, 3♣ asks about mayorholdings,  3♠ shows 3+♠ and less than 4 ♥.

 

I would bid 6♦, 6♠ is not enough, and 6♥ might suggest ♥AK, 6♣ may suggest 2 of the top honnors only, so 6♦ should be the right bid.

2nt game forcing is fine, except many experts respond lite WITH 3 OR 4 HCP..perhaps very light.

XXXXX

XXX

VOID

XXXXX

[beatrix45]

6S. 34-35 hcp and a balanced versus a semibalanced hand, the grand is unlikely.

 

Peter

:ph34r:

This is an excellent point. Lacking 37 HCP, there is liable to be a hole somewhere in the hand. Furthermore, partner announces only three trumps and, probably, very little in the way of useful distribution.

 

To make seven lay down, you need the club K PLUS the right Q or J to cover the fourth small club in your hand, hence, partner needs to hold one out of only a few specific hands:

 

Jxx

Kxx(x)

AKxx

AKJ(x)

 

Jxx

xxx(x)

AKQx

AKJ(x)

 

Jxx

KQx(x)

Axxx

AKJ(x)

 

Jxx

Kxx(x)

AKQx

AK(x)

 

plus a few more variations on the hands above. Based on the bidding, I am willing to gamble on partner having both minor suit aces, but not on those PLUS the club K AND another trick-taking minor honour. Further, with only eight trumps, lack of the spade J makes us go down 32% of the time.

[Chamaco]

I agree with all people saying that 7 may be too high.

 

But it also might be laydown :ph34r:

 

The point is thate WE DO NOT KNOW, so we should not be making ourselves the choice, but let partner choose, delivering him all the info we can.

 

That's why I think there should a way for cooperative investigation, e.g.: there should be a way to show 3 top honors AND an extra feature.

 

The "extra feature" (our club Q) may be the key for the grand, and the knowledge of it should allow partner to make an intelligent decision.

[whereagles]

This hand is very complicated.

 

Argument 1:

If pard's bidding is to be trusted, then he's only worried about trumps. That must mean the remaining is solid, e.g. he should have something like

 

Jxx

Kxx

AKQJx

Ax

 

Opposite our AKQxx Ax xx Qxxx, the grand should make.

 

Argument 2:

But wait... if pard held that hand, he could have bid RKCB himself, no? So why doesn't he have instead the minor suit aces and is worried about a spade loser, e.g.

 

Jxx

KQx

AKxx

AJx

 

Argument 3:

Well.. this 2nd hand can bid RKCB as well. Later, if there are 5 keys + queen, pard can bid 6D asking for some help in diamonds. So perhaps pard has solid diamonds after all and we're back to argument 1. After all, he doesn't HAVE to bid RKCB with solid diamonds, he might have preferred the 5S bid.

 

As you see, it is not at all easy to understand what pard has. He does have one of the hands above. Which do you think it is and why? :ph34r:

[Fluffy]

I don't have to guess, he might have a void, he might have ♣Ax with ♦AKQJxxx and needs ♠ to run, otherwise there is no time to discard, or anything. HE has asked, I just answer.

[Guest Jlall]

it's not easy to see what partner has because 5S is not a possible bid with a balanced hand. To find out about high trumps there is a bid called keycard. The only time a 5S trump asking bid should be used is if A) 4N is not keycard or B) Partner has a void. Thus, 5S if it is indeed a trump ask is silly no matter what partner has on this hand. I usually play in response to a 5M trump ask, 5N shows the AKQ. I will bid that even if we dont have that agreement hoping partner is intelligent enough to know that to be trying for 7 I probably have teh AKQ of spades.

[beatrix45]

:( :( :( :)

 

Ran simulation using Pavlicek's program, my new toy. Over 36 deals, assuming that partner's bidding made holding the two missing aces a certainty, 7S would make exactly 50% of the time. In two cases it was laydown, and in two more it was over 90%. Sixteen cases offered less than a 50% play, seven more were at 50% (more or less), and nine were in the 68% area.

 

I suppose the percentage one needs to bid a grand depends on the type of scoring and the state of the match, but usually folks say you need 60%+ to justify it versus a small slam - this isn't a five or seven hand. This hand isn't that good. Again, what made the difference was the slight shortage of HCP.

 

Watching the 7♣ - 7NT disaster in the finals of the Team Trials Sunday makes me think that the simple Milton Work point count really is the best way to evaluate balanced hands in deciding whether to bid the grand.

 

P.S. Just ran a second simulation adding one more HCP to the combined hands. It increased the probability of making seven from 50% to 70%.

[Walddk]

If his only concern is what I have in spades, I think I have an easy 7♠. He can't have less than

 

xxx

Kx

AKQJx

Axx

 

I may even consider 7NT in case he has AJ10 in clubs and spades don't break. However, in real life with my regular partner I would bid 5NT showing all three top honours and denying a side king. Then he can ask for ♣Q by bidding 6♣ if he wants.

 

Maybe he has

 

xxx

Kx

AKQxx

AKx

 

Roland

[Guest Jlall]

still don't understand why not KEYCARD with that hand...can find out about... aces and the KQ of trumps...gee..

[Walddk]

still don't understand why not KEYCARD with that hand...can find out about... aces and the KQ of trumps...gee..

Because partner forgot that ace asking is on our cc I suppose. Strange, I agree, but let's help him recover from his mental lapse.

 

Roland

[whereagles]

Well, what happened is hands were

 

♠ Jxx........AKQxx

♥ KQx.......Ax

♦ AKT9......xx

♣ AJx........Qxxx

 

1♦ 1♠

2NT 3♣

3♠ 4♥

5♠ ...?

 

and at table East bid a direct 7♠, judging pard only required help in trumps. Perhaps he should have bid 5NT (all honors), or 6♣ (all honors, asking for a little help in clubs), but this wasn't a regular partnership, so he didn't want to muddy the waters.

 

West could, and perhaps should, have bid RKCB. He didn't want to take control because he was "a limited hand". But 5♠ wasn't the way out. That confused East and led to... disaster. The club king was offside.

[flytoox]

He didn't want to take control because he was "a limited hand".

This is not a good reason. Bridge is a partnership game. After your limited bid, pd still shows slam interest by bidding 4H. You have a good hand in the context. There is nothing wrogn with 4N keycard asking.

[han]

Blackwood seems appropriate.

[whereagles]

He didn't want to take control because he was "a limited hand".

This is not a good reason. Bridge is a partnership game. After your limited bid, pd still shows slam interest by bidding 4H. You have a good hand in the context. There is nothing wrogn with 4N keycard asking.

Yeah, that's what East told West.. a limited hand can still take SOME action, especially if it's a strong hand as this one was. 4NT followed by a quick sign-off in 6S seems ok (no grand slam try because West knows clubs are not solid).

[HeartA]

I am surprised that why nobody here mentioned 4♠ by opener. After all, he has limited his hand by 2NT. There is nothing wrong to bid 4S and let pd take control.

[Chamaco]

I am surprised that why nobody here mentioned 4♠ by opener.  After all, he has limited his hand by 2NT.  There is nothing wrong to bid 4S and let pd take control.

 

IMO 4S would show a missing control in the minor suits, since pard has already expressed the will to explore slam by bidding 4H.

 

4H by responder denies minor suit controls, so I think 4S should mean signoff, not the reliquishing of captainship.

 

I believe that once responder has showed slam interest, using RKCB seems well appropriate, and in fact, here it works quite fine:

when opener hears of pard's 2KC+Q, he asks for the club K, and when responder denies, he signs off in 6S