Hand 4 - 1981 Bermuda Bowl

[Winstonm]

This comes from the actual Bermuda Bowl but was presented in a bidding poll by Richard Pavlicek. The conditions are that you can only play a basic 2/1 with 100% forcing NT and accept the bidding as presented prior to the question.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=shakqjt8654dkck65&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1hp1sp]133|200[/hv]

 

Now what?

[nullve]

Now what?

3♣ (systemic)

[smerriman]

3♣ (systemic)

Agreed - seems too strong for 4♥.

[mikeh]

3♣ (systemic)

I bid 3N, systemic (shows this exact hand)

 

Actually, I do play that 3C is artificial and would, in those partnerships, make the bid. However, given that we are told that we’re playing a basic 2/1 it’s unhelpful, to say the least, to provide this as the answer. Indeed, it’s blindingly obvious that we don’t have this tool available since the problem is trivial otherwise.

 

Playing no gadget, the danger of 3C is that partner might bid 5C or do something even more drastic, such that we may be correcting to an unpalatable level.

 

So, is there a plausible alternative?

 

We can bid 4H, ensuring that we at least reach the best suit. Note that we haven’t missed slam yet….indeed it’s possible to go down in 4H!

 

The good news is that we have no side aces, so if we have slam, partner has at least two of them, which means he may have enough to make a move over 4H

 

But Jxxxx x Axx Axxx is a lay down grand and he is probably passing 4H.

 

Thus I conclude that we don’t have a better option than 3C. The good news is that any player good enough to play in the Bermuda bowl will be aware that 3C is the most likely fake jumpshift (I’d say the only fake jumpshift)

 

So I bid 3C. I’m dreaming of a 3H preference.

[Winstonm]

Top two bids were 3C (big surprise ) and 5H. Justin was not quoted.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=shakqjt9654dkck65&w=s96532h732dq5cj97&n=saqt4hdaj862ct842&e=skj87h8dt9743caq3&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1hp1sp3cp3dp3hp4cp4hp6hppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Zia got to 6H - not on this auction (he opened 2C). He got a spade lead, inserted the 10, then went down when he mis-guessed the endgame.

[LBengtsson]

Think that jillybeans CRO convention would be good here...:) though I have not tested all responses

 

Posted 2021-April-06, 15:07

 

4♣ "CRO" is a very popular club treatment here in Aotearoa, so much so that 4♣ is used almost exclusively for Ace asking.

 

After 4♣

 

4♦ 1/4 Aces

4♥ 3/0 Aces

4♠ 2 Aces same Colour

4NT 2 Aces same Rank (Major/Minor)

5♣ 2 Aces - opposite (major & minor)

5D 2 Aces, 1 King

5H 2 Aces, 2 Kings

and so on

 

I'm playing with a few people who are interested to learn 2/1, I don't want to change all of their systems and CRO is something they seem to want to hold on to. While I don't like CRO it may be because cue bidding is virtually non existent and players will jump to 4♣ and leave partner in the dark as to where they are going.

Another problem here is I think people may have included the #King response into 4♣ Ace ask, where some play #King ask as another step.

 

If I can introduce cue bidding, does it matter so much if we use CRO or RKC responses? (

As I write this I think I know the answer, after CRO we still do not know about the K,Q trump and are at the 5 level.)