13 easy tricks

[smerriman]

[hv=https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html??s=SAK2HAKDQ93CAKQT4&n=SJ74HJ963DAKJT82&d=e&a=p2CP3DP]400|300[/hv]

But how do you count them from here?

 

[edit] now that I've thought about it, a 6th diamond, queen of spades, queen of hearts, ruffing out the jack of clubs.. I guess this is just a straight 7♦ call rather than anything more scientific. So probably not an interesting hand.

[Cyberyeti]

We play minorwood in exactly one auction type, 2♣-3m-4m is it.

 

2♣-3♦-4♦-6♣(2 and a void club)-7♦ is a short sweet auction if partner is 4450, the heart ruff is the 13th trick.

 

You are only wrong if partner has something like QJxx, QJxx, AKxxx and the diamonds misbehave.

[DavidKok]

I'd rather like to be in 7NT opposite both the diagram hand and the 'wrong' hand. Jumping over a strong 2♣ should have a very specific meaning, because too often you are preempting opener. There are good ways to go about this, I personally play a rather simple natural structure where 3♦ shows 6+ diamonds with at least two of the three top honours.

[Cyberyeti]

I'd rather like to be in 7NT opposite both the diagram hand and the 'wrong' hand. Jumping over a strong 2♣ should have a very specific meaning, because too often you are preempting opener. There are good ways to go about this, I personally play a rather simple natural structure where 3♦ shows 6+ diamonds with at least two of the three top honours.

 

This is reasonable, what I meant was 7♦ was wrong on the wrong hand because 7N makes but 7♦ may not, the reason for being in 7♦ is xxxx, xxxx, AKJ10x, void where 7♦ makes as long as there's no stiff heart but 7N may not, if you insist on a 6 card suit there is no problem with this hand, but you will make it difficult on some other hands where you can't use the positive.

[jillybean]

2♣ : 2♦

3N : 7N

[Cyberyeti]

2♣ : 2♦

3N : 7N

 

Partner has AKQ, AKx, xx, AKQxx, you like bidding grands on finesses ?

[Douglas43]

If you are not playing minorwood, wouldn't 4NT be RKCB for diamonds?

[Cyberyeti]

If you are not playing minorwood, wouldn't 4NT be RKCB for diamonds?

 

In which auction ?

 

We opted to play 2♣-3♦-4♦ as minorwood because we wanted to reserve 4♥ which would be our normal ace ask in diamonds for the "solid heart suit please cue" hand.

[Trinidad]

The 3♦ response takes up a ton of bidding space. You can only do that if it means something specific.

 

For most players a positive response (e.g. 2♥ or 2♠) shows two of the top three and at least five cards in the suit. You would try to avoid these bids when you want to put other strains in the picture. If your response doesn't take much room, then a second possible strain is all right. You could bid 2♥ with ♠9754 ♥AK974 ♦Q3 ♣72: You will raise opener's 2♠ rebid to 3♠ and you have painted a perfect picture of your hand: Spade fit, heart suit, slam interest.

 

But if you take away a lot of bidding space, you cannot have a second strain. This means that 3♦ should show a six card suit: You cannot have a side suit, and with a balanced hand (5♦332) there is no reason to jump.

 

Once South realizes this, he has an easy rebid. He has 2 tricks in spades, 2 in hearts, 6 in diamonds and 3 in clubs, for a total of 13. So he can bid 7NT. This can only go wrong if one opponent has ♦JTxx (and if partner has the ♦8, it only goes wrong if East is that opponent). And even if South is that unlucky, he still isn't down in 7NT.

 

Rik

[Douglas43]

In which auction ?

 

We opted to play 2♣-2♦-4♦ as minorwood because we wanted to reserve 4♥ which would be our normal ace ask in diamonds for the "solid heart suit please cue" hand.

 

Sorry I meant in the actual auction of 2♣ - 3♦. If in doubt, then by all means raise to 4♦ and follow with RKCB. I would certainly respond 3♦ to 2♣, but I do play the style that a positive shows a good suit.

[mikestar13]

I'd rather like to be in 7NT opposite both the diagram hand and the 'wrong' hand. Jumping over a strong 2♣ should have a very specific meaning, because too often you are preempting opener. There are good ways to go about this, I personally play a rather simple natural structure where 3♦ shows 6+ diamonds with at least two of the three top honours.

 

Playing this structure, opener has an absolutely easy 7NT. If the partnership would allow 3♦ on weaker diamonds, this is a perfect hand for the grand slam force, assuming you play that.

[Cyberyeti]

Sorry I meant in the actual auction of 2♣ - 3♦. If in doubt, then by all means raise to 4♦ and follow with RKCB. I would certainly respond 3♦ to 2♣, but I do play the style that a positive shows a good suit.

 

Sorry, mistyped, that's what I meant, 2♣-3♦-4♦ we play as MW

[pescetom]

We play minorwood in exactly one auction type, 2♣-3m-4m is it.

 

2♣-3♦-4♦-6♣(2 and a void club)-7♦ is a short sweet auction if partner is 4450, the heart ruff is the 13th trick.

 

You are only wrong if partner has something like QJxx, QJxx, AKxxx and the diamonds misbehave.

 

We play Crosswood here and it would probably go:

2♣ - 3♦

4♣ - 5♣

7N - p

 

Under our agreements a 3♦ response would never be 5-card. And a 2♣ opening would almost never be a clubs single suit: if so, then over 3♦ just investigate slam in diamonds and then do something sensible.

[Cyberyeti]

We play Crosswood here and it would probably go:

2♣ - 3♦

4♣ - 5♣

7N - p

 

Under our agreements a 3♦ response would never be 5-card. And a 2♣ opening would almost never be a clubs single suit: if so, then over 3♦ just investigate slam in diamonds and then do something sensible.

 

The problem with 3 diamonds never being 5 is that quite often you will never get across that your 3352 that you bid as balanced contains a source of tricks, hence partner undercounts by 1 or 2.

[DavidKok]

The 3♦ response takes up a ton of bidding space. You can only do that if it means something specific.

 

For most players a positive response (e.g. 2♥ or 2♠) shows two of the top three and at least five cards in the suit. You would try to avoid these bids when you want to put other strains in the picture. If your response doesn't take much room, then a second possible strain is all right. You could bid 2♥ with ♠9754 ♥AK974 ♦Q3 ♣72: You will raise opener's 2♠ rebid to 3♠ and you have painted a perfect picture of your hand: Spade fit, heart suit, slam interest.

 

But if you take away a lot of bidding space, you cannot have a second strain. This means that 3♦ should show a six card suit: You cannot have a side suit, and with a balanced hand (5♦332) there is no reason to jump.

 

Once South realizes this, he has an easy rebid. He has 2 tricks in spades, 2 in hearts, 6 in diamonds and 3 in clubs, for a total of 13. So he can bid 7NT. This can only go wrong if one opponent has ♦JTxx (and if partner has the ♦8, it only goes wrong if East is that opponent). And even if South is that unlucky, he still isn't down in 7NT.

 

Rik

3♦ should be a specific hand type because it takes up bidding room. But the same principle applies to opener's rebid - no need to jump four levels on slam auctions. Take your time and explore the options. I think this focus on ace-asking bids is premature, especially if there is uncertainty about the length of the diamond suit. And to clarify: the system I play adheres to the idea that a jump to 3♦ should be specific, but it is far from optimal. The hands shown just happen to be a good fit for the simple system.

[nullve]

Does anyone know how to bid these hands starting

 

2♣(1)-2♦(2)

2♥(3)-2♠(4)

2N(5)-3♣(6)

3♥(7)

 

(1) strong

(2) waiting

(3) Birthright ("Kokish")

(4) waiting

(5) 25+ BAL

(6) Muppet Stayman

(7) no major

 

?

[pescetom]

The problem with 3 diamonds never being 5 is that quite often you will never get across that your 3352 that you bid as balanced contains a source of tricks, hence partner undercounts by 1 or 2.

Not usually an issue for us I think. Responder never makes a 2NT "preempt" to show points: if opener shows a balanced hand with some level of 2NT, then his HCP is defined in steps of 2 and so Responder is well placed to make quantitative decisions/invites and can take account of his own source of tricks.

Even if Responder has a major and goes through our Stayman without finding a fit, he can still bid quantitatively or show a 5-card minor (although over 2NT that needs a lot to justify the level of bidding).

[Cyberyeti]

Not usually an issue for us I think. Responder never makes a 2NT "preempt" to show points: if opener shows a balanced hand with some level of 2NT, then his HCP is defined in steps of 2 and so Responder is well placed to make quantitative decisions/invites and can take account of his own source of tricks.

Even if Responder has a major and goes through our Stayman without finding a fit, he can still bid quantitatively or show a 5-card minor (although over 2NT that needs a lot to justify the level of bidding).

 

Not exactly, how do you bid a balanced 25 or a balanced 27 ? opposite a balanced hand.

 

What enquiries do you use over a 3N rebid for example ? Or do you use an unlimited rebid after Kokish so you lose the 2 point ranges.

 

The problem is where partner has a diamond suit that is good but not solid, you need to get it agreed early enough to find out whether partner has the missing Q.

[pescetom]

Not exactly, how do you bid a balanced 25 or a balanced 27 ? opposite a balanced hand.

 

What enquiries do you use over a 3N rebid for example ? Or do you use an unlimited rebid after Kokish so you lose the 2 point ranges.

 

The problem is where partner has a diamond suit that is good but not solid, you need to get it agreed early enough to find out whether partner has the missing Q.

 

We can handle it well opposite any balanced hand up to and including 25 (24-25 is Kokish 2N).

After that we still have 2 point ranges, but over 3N methods are obviously less scientific although we still have a 4♠ baron for minors if really necessary.

The odds of 26-27 HCP are already 0.0012 so I don't lose much sleep over developments there B-)

[Cyberyeti]

We can handle it well opposite any balanced hand up to and including 25 (24-25 is Kokish 2N).

After that we still have 2 point ranges, but over 3N methods are obviously less scientific although we still have a 4♠ baron for minors if really necessary.

The odds of 26-27 HCP are already 0.0012 so I don't lose much sleep over developments there B-)

 

I asked the question because I would bid this one as 26, it's a really powerful hand making a grand opposite QJxxx, xxx, Ax(x), xx(x) and ♦AKJxx and out

[Trinidad]

3♦ should be a specific hand type because it takes up bidding room. But the same principle applies to opener's rebid - no need to jump four levels on slam auctions. Take your time and explore the options. I think this focus on ace-asking bids is premature, especially if there is uncertainty about the length of the diamond suit. And to clarify: the system I play adheres to the idea that a jump to 3♦ should be specific, but it is far from optimal. The hands shown just happen to be a good fit for the simple system.

I argued that as soon as North shows 6 diamonds with two of the top 3 honors (with his 3♦ response) South should bid 7NT. There is no reason to ask for aces, whether by Blackwood, Minorwood or Ron Wood. South knows that there are 13 top tricks in NT and that every suit is controled. Why would you want to "take time and explore the options" when you know that 7NT is the right contract? The only option I see is that partner misunderstands your exploring and you end up playing in 4NT or something silly like that. Those are not options I wish to explore.

 

Rik

[DavidKok]

I argued that as soon as North shows 6 diamonds with two of the top 3 honors (with his 3♦ response) South should bid 7NT. There is no reason to ask for aces, whether by Blackwood, Minorwood or Ron Wood. South knows that there are 13 top tricks in NT and that every suit is controled. Why would you want to "take time and explore the options" when you know that 7NT is the right contract? The only option I see is that partner misunderstands your exploring and you end up playing in 4NT or something silly like that. Those are not options I wish to explore.

 

Rik

Partner's 3♦ does not promise the jack, where are the 13 top tricks? Also who said anything about the 'woods?

[Trinidad]

Partner's 3♦ does not promise the jack, where are the 13 top tricks? Also who said anything about the 'woods?

Partner's 3♦ did not promise the jack, but you don't need the jack to make 7NT the obvious bid.

You are essentially asking two questions:

1. Do you want to be in a grand opposite six diamonds headed by the AK?

2. What grand should it be?

 

Let's start with question 2:

As I said above, 7NT will fail if partner doesn't have the jack, diamonds split 4-0 (the wrong way) and nothing else good happens. But if the diamonds split 4-0 the wrong way, you are never going to make 7♦, while there is a small possibility that you can make 7NT. In addition, in 7NT you cannot suffer a ruff at trick 1. Therefore 7NT is a better contract than 7♦.

 

And now for question 1:

Do you want to be in a grand?

The grand has a 90% probability of making opposite ♦AK6542 and nothing else, the worst hand that partner could have. (Diamonds splitting 2-2 or 3-1 = 90 %). That means that you want to bid it even if he has that worst hand. There is no bad news that partner can give you, other that that he missorted his hand, that will stop you from bidding 7NT.

Additional questions ("How many diamonds do you have?", "Do you have the jack?") could tell you that the grand is 100 %, but they don't answer the question whether you should bid it. The 3♦ response already showed that.

 

Also who said anything about the 'woods?

You did:

I think this focus on ace-asking bids is premature

And I argued that ace asking bids are not merely premature, but simply unnecessary if you already have the information that 7NT is the right contract to bid.

 

Rik

[pescetom]

I asked the question because I would bid this one as 26, it's a really powerful hand making a grand opposite QJxxx, xxx, Ax(x), xx(x) and ♦AKJxx and out

 

I agree it's worth 26, but I would bid it 25 to maintain the better systems on over 2N.

Although I think the hand you cite would find grand over 3N anyway (4♥ transfer and control-bidding).

[Cyberyeti]

I agree it's worth 26, but I would bid it 25 to maintain the better systems on over 2N.

Although I think the hand you cite would find grand over 3N anyway (4♥ transfer and control-bidding).

 

The first hand is not difficult, it's more an issue with the second (♦AKJxx and out) where you may never get to find out it's AKJxx rather than AKx and partner just bids 6N not visualising a grand is even in the picture as you need an off the scale good 25.