jillybean Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 [hv=pc=n&s=sa9hak654daq9c762&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1sp2h(5%2B%20gf)p3c(clubs%2C%20K%20more%20than%20min?)p]133|200[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 If you have 4N quantitative available, it's what you want to bid, if not I guess 3♦. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas43 Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 Subject to defining partner's 3♣ agree with Cyberyeti's first choice. We have 17 with fabulous controls but not a great fit, and partner's bid is at least "a king over minimum" (taken to be a good 14 upwards) we must be close to 6NT. 4NT is unambiguously quantitative because we have a natural 4♣ (or 3♠) to set the suit as trumps. A pair that plays the system must have an agreement as to the minimum hcp value of 3♣, but on the basis that "a king over minimum" means 14hcp, then 4NT from me. If "a king over minimum" means a good 15 hcp upwards, then 6NT direct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBengtsson Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 I see problem. if p is 5♣/5♠ no ♦ control, say 5♠1♥2♦5♣ if you bid 3♦ then what partner bid next 3♠(?), then what do you next bid? 4NT? quantitative or rkcb? with good controls and 17 points I would gamble 6nt after 3♣ - not science but the ♠A is a good card. you might get ♦ lead from the ♦K. 6nt looks about where you want to be, except if partner comes up with ♠KQJ10x ♥xx ♦x ♣AKQxx so sensible bid is 3♦ after 3♣ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 I see problem. if p is 5♣/5♠ no ♦ control, say 5♠1♥2♦5♣ if you bid 3♦ then what partner bid next 3♠(?), then what do you next bid? 4NT? quantitative or rkcb? with good controls and 17 points I would gamble 6nt after 3♣ - not science but the ♠A is a good card. you might get ♦ lead from the ♦K. 6nt looks about where you want to be, except if partner comes up with ♠KQJ10x ♥xx ♦x ♣AKQxx so sensible bid is 3♦ after 3♣ Well also unless partner comes up with KJxxx, Q, KJx, KQJx where 4N is plenty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted March 22, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 [hv=pc=n&s=sa9hak654daq9c762&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1sp2h(5%2B%20gf)p3c(clubs%2C%20K%20more%20than%20min)p3dp3sp?]133|200[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas43 Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 This illustrates why 4NT was better than 3♦. Now 4NT would be ambiguous. I'd punt 6NT and hope for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted March 22, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 Actually, we can stop after the 3♣ bid. All I needed to check was my belief, with what I hold opposite "a K more than min", is that we should be in 6nt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 Actually, we can stop after the 3♣ bid. All I needed to check was my belief, with what I hold opposite "a K more than min", is that we should be in 6nt. Depends what the K above minimum looks like, there are plenty of minimum hands where 6 is good (KQJ10x, Q, Kxx, Axxx is cold for example) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted March 22, 2021 Report Share Posted March 22, 2021 Is this MP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted March 23, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 Depends what the K above minimum looks like, there are plenty of minimum hands where 6 is good (KQJ10x, Q, Kxx, Axxx is cold for example)I mean we can stop the discussion, not the bidding It was MP.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 I mean we can stop the discussion, not the bidding It was MP.. What I was trying to say is that you need to invite a slam but not bid one, but also that partner needs to look at texture more than points on whether they accept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts