I bid a slam directly after a 2C opener

[mikl_plkcc]

This is probably the fastest slam I have bid in my life:

 

[hv=pc=n&w=saqj984hkj9dak3ca&e=skha765djt842cq97&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=ppp2cp2sp6sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

2♣ = strong hand (20+ unbal / 22+ bal / 1.5 tricks short of game)

2♠ = 3 controls (A=2, K=1)

6♠ = TO PLAY!!!!!!!!!

 

The reason that I bid so damn fast was that the conventional response provided immediate count that a 6♠ contract was highly likely (only 1 K is missing). Result was 6♠=, 50% MP only out of 7 tables. Our contract was wrong-sided because of the conventional response, and the other two right-sided 6♠ made all 13 tricks. There were also 2 tables bid 6NT, one made and one set. There were only 2 tables not reaching slam, at 4♠ and 3NT respectively.

 

I'm interested in how the others bid this slam using various methods.

[TylerE]

You're going to look pretty foolish whenever partner comes down with a spade void, and/or 7m makes.

[pilowsky]

I would like to know as well.

My preference is 2♣ forces 2♦ if no interference.

Allowing the opener to describe their hand better.

I'm aware that others use relays and point/shape showing bids, but the advantage isn't clear to me.

[Cyberyeti]

You're going to look pretty foolish whenever partner comes down with a spade void, and/or 7m makes.

 

Indeed, partner can have void, AQxx, Qxxxxx, Kxx where 7N is cold and you won't make 6♠ unless you're very lucky.

 

I don't like the control showing responses because they cramp auctions like this, if I playes this system I'd open 1♠.

[mikl_plkcc]

Are you serious you will open 1S holding a 22 count unbalanced?

[DavidKok]

I'd open 2♣ with this because I have an easy 2♠ bid on the second round, partner will almost always bid 2♦ in my system. In your system I don't see a downside of bidding 3♠ over 2♠. I think opening 1♠ is not the best opening bid but is also not crazy - if you were to swap the diamonds and spades, for example, I think it's close between showing a ~23 point notrump and opening 1♦.

[Cyberyeti]

I'd open 2♣ with this because I have an easy 2♠ bid on the second round, partner will almost always bid 2♦ in my system. In your system I don't see a downside of bidding 3♠ over 2♠. I think opening 1♠ is not the best opening bid but is also not crazy - if you were to swap the diamonds and spades, for example, I think it's close between showing a ~23 point notrump and opening 1♦.

 

How do you bid after 2♣-2♠-3♠ ? The auction is already really cramped ?

 

We would start 2♣-2N-3♠ if we opened 2♣ so not much better off, but at least we know partner has a hand that is 9+ and the auction is F4N.

 

Are you serious you will open 1S holding a 22 count unbalanced?

 

I will open some unbalanced 22s 1♠ (2♣-2♦-2♠ is FG for us so we have a fairly high bar for 2♣), I would only do it with this one if I played these responses.

[mikl_plkcc]

I'd open 2♣ with this because I have an easy 2♠ bid on the second round, partner will almost always bid 2♦ in my system. In your system I don't see a downside of bidding 3♠ over 2♠. I think opening 1♠ is not the best opening bid but is also not crazy - if you were to swap the diamonds and spades, for example, I think it's close between showing a ~23 point notrump and opening 1♦.

If I bid 3♠ in the second round, it will likely go 2♣ - 2♠ - 3♠ - 4♦ - 6NT. I admit this is better now and my "bridge judgement" is lacking after a few years of absence in the game.

 

If I swap diamonds and spades, it is still a solid 2♣ opener here. Opening a 1♦ massively understates the hand and will probably be responded with a 3NT to play directly by the partner, and opening any NT is just a blatant lie on the shape.

[Cyberyeti]

If I bid 3♠ in the second round, it will likely go 2♣ - 2♠ - 3♠ - 4♦ - 6NT. I admit this is better now and my "bridge judgement" is lacking after a few years of absence in the game.

 

If I swap diamonds and spades, it is still a solid 2♣ opener here. Opening a 1♦ massively understates the hand and will probably be responded with a 3NT to play directly by the partner, and opening any NT is just a blatant lie on the shape.

 

4♦ and 6N are strange bids, you don't bid bad suits on good hands, if partner did bid 4♦ I'd picture QJxxx minimum and expect to be making 7N if partner's K is in spades.

[mikl_plkcc]

4♦ and 6N are strange bids, you don't bid bad suits on good hands, if partner did bid 4♦ I'd picture QJxxx minimum and expect to be making 7N if partner's K is in spades.

 

I don't understand the reason of your saying "you don't bid bad suits on good hands". I only bid according to the length strictly, with only overcalls and preempts having strength requirement. For example, I always bid xxxxx first then AKQJ in an uncontested auction, as trump length is the most important thing in making a contract. The reason of having strict length requirement is to make sure that we have the most efficient method in finding the LONGEST trump fit.

 

For example,

♠xxxxx♥AKQJT♦AK♣x is an automatic 1♠ opener for me.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't understand the reason of your saying "you don't bid bad suits on good hands". I only bid according to the length strictly, with only overcalls and preempts having strength requirement. For example, I always bid xxxxx first then AKQJ in an uncontested auction, as trump length is the most important thing in making a contract. The reason of having strict length requirement is to make sure that we have the most efficient method in finding the LONGEST trump fit.

 

For example,

♠xxxxx♥AKQJT♦AK♣x is an automatic 1♠ opener for me.

 

If you are already in a slammy auction, you don't normally bid a crap suit, partner tends to take you a bit more seriously, BEFORE you're in a slammy auction, fair enough, bid on length.

[DavidKok]

How do you bid after 2♣-2♠-3♠ ? The auction is already really cramped ?

 

We would start 2♣-2N-3♠ if we opened 2♣ so not much better off, but at least we know partner has a hand that is 9+ and the auction is F4N.

Yes, it is. This is not the system I prefer over 2♣. I also think showing 3 controls opposite a 2♣ opening should perhaps force to at least 4NT. But this is exactly the tradeoff when opening 2♣ - your auction will be cramped and annoying, but at least you're getting to game opposite ~3 points and partner will try for slam on a modest 8 or so.

 

If I bid 3♠ in the second round, it will likely go 2♣ - 2♠ - 3♠ - 4♦ - 6NT. I admit this is better now and my "bridge judgement" is lacking after a few years of absence in the game.

 

If I swap diamonds and spades, it is still a solid 2♣ opener here. Opening a 1♦ massively understates the hand and will probably be responded with a 3NT to play directly by the partner, and opening any NT is just a blatant lie on the shape.

Showing a very strong (19+) NT with a singleton honour is very often the smallest lie, and is quite a popular decision. I'm not sure why you and your partner are trying to jump so much - first with 6♠, now with 6NT, and next with 3NT on some alternative auction after flipping suits. If you are in a force try to keep the bidding low and make maximum use of your bidding space. I don't know if you had ways to show two-suiters over 2♣ earlier, if so 4♥ now ought to show a control for diamond slam. But if not- partner has already shown controls with 2♠, what would 4NT be? Maybe something good, such as forcing with support for diamonds?

[Winstonm]

Two club auctions are inherently cramped. You have to choose to tightly define 2c and responses and leave all other openings at the 1-level or take a loose approach to 2c and understand that you will be guessing a lot

[mikl_plkcc]

Showing a very strong (19+) NT with a singleton honour is very often the smallest lie, and is quite a popular decision. I'm not sure why you and your partner are trying to jump so much - first with 6♠, now with 6NT, and next with 3NT on some alternative auction after flipping suits. If you are in a force try to keep the bidding low and make maximum use of your bidding space. I don't know if you had ways to show two-suiters over 2♣ earlier, if so 4♥ now ought to show a control for diamond slam. But if not- partner has already shown controls with 2♠, what would 4NT be? Maybe something good, such as forcing with support for diamonds?

 

I don't have any continuation defined after a 2♣ opener, and all bids starting from opener's rebid are natural. And a 4NT bid in constructive auction, without trump agreement, is always a quantitative invite to 6NT (with trump agreement it is RKCB). We have defined trump agreement to be an immediate raise, same suit bid by the same person 3 times (or 2 times starting with a preempt), or any other auctions which show an 8-card fit. So 2♣ - 2♠ - 3♠ - 4♦ - 4NT is non-forcing here and asks responder to bid 6NT with extra values.

 

And for me, lying on shape is a very huge lie unless partner is limited, and certainly not to be used in constructive auctions. If I am forced to make a lie, I will lie on strength instead of shape. And I take NT openers very seriously that it can only ever be 4333, 4432 or 5m332, because all the continuations defined to find a 8-card major fit (the first priority of all constructive bidding sequences) for all possible responder shapes are based on such assumptions.

[nullve]

I'm interested in how the others bid this slam using various methods.

[hv=pc=n&e=saqj984hkj9dak3ca&w=skha765djt842cq97&d=n&v=n&b=5]266|100[/hv]

(rotated for convenience)

 

nullve(W)-nullve(E):

 

P(1)-2♦(2)

2♥(3)-2N(4)

3♣(5)-3♦(6)

3♥(7)-3♠(8)

3N(9)-4♦(10)

4♥(11)-4♠(12)

5♣(13)-5♦(14)

5♥(15)-6♣(16)

6N(17)-P

 

(1) normalish (in 2nd seat)

(2) 2- or 3-suited canapé preempt in spades OR unBAL GF with primary spades

(3) P/C opposite the preemptive type

(4) GF, roughly either 1-suited or 5+S4+C

(5) relay

(6) 1-suited

(7) relay with slam interest

(8) 62(32) or something with C (6331, 7(21)3, 7330, 8221, ...)

(9) relay

(10) 6331, usually 22-24 (non-walrus) hcp

(11) Parity Key Card Blackwood in D

(12) even # of key cards

(13) trump Q ask

(14) no trump Q

(15) ♥K ask

(16) ♥K, ♠Q, no ♥Q

(17) contract (at MPs)

[pescetom]

I would be tempted to treat this as balanced given the ♧A, in which case:

2♧ 2◇

2♡ 2♤

2NT 6NT

p

 

If not, I would probably opt for the (admittedly imprecise) option of imposing trumps in spades, once partner confirms he has at least a king:

2♧ 2◇

3♤ 4♡

4NT 5♡

6♤ p

[Cyberyeti]

Our auction would be slightly clumsy if we opened 2♣.

 

2♣-2N (9+ bal or sometimes a bad 5m F4N)

3♠(this is more often often 6 non solid than for most, we play an art 3♣ here and would bid 3N with 5332)-3N

4N (guaranteed exactly 6 card spades as no second suit bid instead or 4♠)-5N

6♠

 

I'm not sure whether 6♠ or 6N is the best spot at MPs, 6N is dodgy on a club lead but does score better.

[fromageGB]

I don't have any continuation defined after a 2♣ opener, and all bids starting from opener's rebid are natural.

I think this is a problem.

 

The bidding in my partnership methods starts with 2♣ because, although marginal, it is not hard to envisage missing a game if 1♠ is passed out.

 

2♣ (probably GF) - 2♦ (positive with at least 1 ace or king, and sets a GF)

2♠ (first or only suit) - 2NT (the next step denies 3 spades and this is my worst suit [to allow opener to bid a second suit])

3♣ (next step = I insist on spades) - 3♥(2 steps = 2 AKs)

3NT (2 steps = asks for cheapest side Q starting with diamonds and going up the ranks) - 4♠ (=none)

4NT (ace asking) - 5♦ (2 steps = 2 of 6 :AAAAKQ)

 

There is no point in looking for side kings as responder cannot have any. Responder has denied both red Qs. Opener can see a possible heart loser on a finesse, and a certain diamond loser as there is nowhere to throw it. If responder has long hearts he will not have an entry after taking the heart finesse. Spades can take a 4-2 break, but they may break more badly. There may be voids around, and it seems slam odds are a bit worse than 50%. I rule out NT because a club lead will give a bigger negative if the heart finesse fails.

 

5♠ or 6♠? I think in matchpoints I bid 5♠, but is very close.

[Cyberyeti]

I think this is a problem.

 

The bidding in my partnership methods starts with 2♣ because, although marginal, it is not hard to envisage missing a game if 1♠ is passed out.

 

2♣ (probably GF) - 2♦ (positive with at least 1 ace or king, and sets a GF)

2♠ (first or only suit) - 2NT (the next step denies 3 spades and this is my worst suit [to allow opener to bid a second suit])

3♣ (next step = I insist on spades) - 3♥(2 steps = 2 AKs)

3NT (2 steps = asks for cheapest side Q starting with diamonds and going up the ranks) - 4♠ (=none)

4NT (ace asking) - 5♦ (2 steps = 2 of 6 :AAAAKQ)

 

There is no point in looking for side kings as responder cannot have any. Responder has denied both red Qs. Opener can see a possible heart loser on a finesse, and a certain diamond loser as there is nowhere to throw it. If responder has long hearts he will not have an entry after taking the heart finesse. Spades can take a 4-2 break, but they may break more badly. There may be voids around, and it seems slam odds are a bit worse than 50%. I rule out NT because a club lead will give a bigger negative if the heart finesse fails.

 

5♠ or 6♠? I think in matchpoints I bid 5♠, but is very close.

 

The problem is that if partner has the ♠K and 5 cards in a red suit, 6♠ is fine, responder has told nothing much about his shape, even ♦J10xx or ♥A10xx are fine.