Test Your Mettle

[Winstonm]

How do you bid? As usual, the system no-frills 2/1. 3C by opener shows extras.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa532hkqdq8764ca8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1hp2dp3cp]133|200[/hv]

[Winstonm]

How do you bid? As usual, the system no-frills 2/1. 3C by opener shows extras.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa532hkqdq8764ca8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1hp2dp3cp]133|200[/hv]

 

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa532hkqdq8764ca8&n=s8haj983dkjckqjt6]133|200[/hv]

 

[mw64ahw]

3NT looks good with a NT slam a possibility opposite a North with more than his shown extras. 4NT could start this enquiry.

However, 3♥ to show an initial preference for ♥ (either 3 small or with honour(s)) as here may be preferable looking to play a slam in the Moysian fit or convert to NT later.

 

Subsequent bids are then

3♠ - denies a ♠ stopper with a weakish ♥ suit

3NT - weakish ♥ suit ♠ stopper choice of games.

4♦ - 3+♦ GF given the extras

4♣ - 5+♣ with a singleton

4♥ -I have 2./3 top honours.

[Cyberyeti]

To me (as a non 2/1 player) 3N would show a minimum 2/1, so I bid 4N (4♦/♠) would be the ace asks, I'm just showing a 3N bid with extras), now partner just bids 6♣ and I can choose to pass or bid 6♥.

[Winstonm]

Do you continue?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa532hkqdq8764ca8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1hp2dp3cp3hp4hp]133|200[/hv]

[Winstonm]

To me (as a non 2/1 player) 3N would show a minimum 2/1, so I bid 4N (4♦/♠) would be the ace asks, I'm just showing a 3N bid with extras), now partner just bids 6♣ and I can choose to pass or bid 6♥.

 

What if your partner shows up with: KQ, AJ98x, xx, KQJ10?

[Cyberyeti]

What if your partner shows up with: KQ, AJ98x, xx, KQJ10?

 

That's about a king worse than the original hand in terms of trick taking potential (the 5th club is a pretty much certain extra trick), I'd pass 4N with that assuming when I showed "extras" with 3♣ 15 was about minimum.

 

K&R gives 18/16.8 so closer than I assess it, but I think enough difference.

[Winstonm]

That's about a king worse than the original hand in terms of trick taking potential (the 5th club is a pretty much certain extra trick), I'd pass 4N with that assuming when I showed "extras" with 3♣ 15 was about minimum.

 

K&R gives 18/16.8 so closer than I assess it, but I think enough difference.

 

Maybe I'm just old fashioned (maybe ) but I have an adverse reaction to using Keycard with an uncontrolled suit. Maybe that's a leftover from years of simple Blackwood.

[Cyberyeti]

Maybe I'm just old fashioned (maybe ) but I have an adverse reaction to using Keycard with an uncontrolled suit. Maybe that's a leftover from years of simple Blackwood.

 

NOT keycard, 4N is quantitative, I said 4♦/♠ would be KC in the suit below

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa532hkqdq8764ca8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1hp2dp3cp]133|200|

Winstonm'How do you bid? As usual, the system no-frills 2/1.

3C by opener shows extras.'

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I rank

1. 3♠ = 4SFG. When partner bypasses 3N, your hand improves.

2. 4N = INV. [/hv]

[smerriman]

I rank

1. 3♠ = 4SFG. When partner bypasses 3N, your hand improves.

2. 4N = INV.

I wondered about that, but how are you planning to continue if partner has nothing more to show and rebids a default 4♥?

 

Count me for a natural 4N. Even if you don't play some form of kickback, you have 4♣ to agree clubs first so it doesn't make much sense to play 4NT as keycard.

[pescetom]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I rank

1. 3♠ = 4SFG. When partner bypasses 3N, your hand improves.

 

Interesting, but I don't see what it has to do with 2/1, however you define no-frills.

3♠ no longer needs to force to game (2♦ did that) and is basically a stopper ask here IMO.

 

I would raise hearts inviting a control-bid, although I recognise that is not mainstream and mikeh will say I am masterminding again.

[Winstonm]

NOT keycard, 4N is quantitative, I said 4♦/♠ would be KC in the suit below

 

Frankly, I am surprised anyone is thinking about a NT contract with partner describing a 2 suited hand and my holdings in his presumed weak suits are only Axxx, and Qxxxx. Sure, not both suits are open but one may be and if so the clubs don't have to be running. In other words, it looks like a suit contract is better - at least to me.

[Winstonm]

Interesting, but I don't see what it has to do with 2/1, however you define no-frills.

3♠ no longer needs to force to game (2♦ did that) and is basically a stopper ask here IMO.

 

I would raise hearts inviting a control-bid, although I recognise that is not mainstream and mikeh will say I am masterminding again.

 

I don't think it masterminding at all. There is no reason to believe that a NT contract is better and partner could still hold a 64 hand while a 5-2 may play just as well if not better than NT. Another reason I like 3H is that it gives partner a chance to continue to tell us how much he likes his hand, and personally I don't think responder has enough to unilaterally commit this hand to any slam.

[DavidKok]

I don't think bidding 3♣ with a 6=4 is normal, taking up a level of bidding space to show clubs instead of the extra heart.

At any rate I'd bid 3♠, fourth suit. 3♥ would show 3 of them, and I don't have any other bid. I'm not exactly eager to play 6NT, even if partner has extras, so 4NT is a distant second.

 

If partner is lacking a spade stopper they might have a problem - say 2=5=2=4 or even 3=5=1=4 with weak spades. Especially if partner has extras that might be awkward to bid. But my alternatives are hardly better. And with, say, 5=5 (hearts-clubs) or 1=5=3=4, partner can explain precisely what they're holding. Now that I think about it, partner might even try 4♦ on the '2=5=2=4, weak spades, extras'-hand, because those extras have to lie in diamonds.

 

This auction is an example of really needing good partnership understanding. Does 3♣ show extra values - or perhaps a minimum with a fifth club? If partner bids 3NT over 3♠, does that show an OK 14 points, or is a reasonable 17 still in the picture? And even on the shown bidding problem: does 3♥ promise 3-card support?

 

Over 3♠, I intend to pass 3NT, correct 4♣ to 4♥ (this shows a not-necessarily-strong 5=5 for me), pass 4♥, and get very excited if partner bids anything else. On a bad day 3NT is cold and 4♥ a disaster.

[smerriman]

.. even if partner has extras ..

 

.. if partner has extras that might be awkward to bid ..

 

Does 3♣ show extra values - or perhaps a minimum with a fifth club? If partner bids 3NT over 3♠, does that show an OK 14 points..

I suspect you might have missed the part of the first post where 3♣ promised extras.

[HardVector]

You need more information. That's why you should bid 3s, partner's response will give you that info. I'd be voting for anything but 3n, that would give partner a good hand with nothing wasted in spades. I'd be perfectly happy to lay down the KQ♥ as dummy verses xxx when I go for a heart slam. Partner may bid 4♦, however. That opens up 7♦.

[Winstonm]

I don't think bidding 3♣ with a 6=4 is normal, taking up a level of bidding space to show clubs instead of the extra heart.

At any rate I'd bid 3♠, fourth suit. 3♥ would show 3 of them, and I don't have any other bid. I'm not exactly eager to play 6NT, even if partner has extras, so 4NT is a distant second.

 

If partner is lacking a spade stopper they might have a problem - say 2=5=2=4 or even 3=5=1=4 with weak spades. Especially if partner has extras that might be awkward to bid. But my alternatives are hardly better. And with, say, 5=5 (hearts-clubs) or 1=5=3=4, partner can explain precisely what they're holding. Now that I think about it, partner might even try 4♦ on the '2=5=2=4, weak spades, extras'-hand, because those extras have to lie in diamonds.

 

This auction is an example of really needing good partnership understanding. Does 3♣ show extra values - or perhaps a minimum with a fifth club? If partner bids 3NT over 3♠, does that show an OK 14 points, or is a reasonable 17 still in the picture? And even on the shown bidding problem: does 3♥ promise 3-card support?

 

Over 3♠, I intend to pass 3NT, correct 4♣ to 4♥ (this shows a not-necessarily-strong 5=5 for me), pass 4♥, and get very excited if partner bids anything else. On a bad day 3NT is cold and 4♥ a disaster.

 

3C shows extras. A 2H rebid does not promise 6. Opener can be 54,55,64,65, or even 66.

[smerriman]

3C shows extras. A 2H rebid does not promise 6. Opener can be 54,55,64,65, or even 66.

2♥ doesn't *promise* 6, but you'd still bid it with virtually all 6-4 hands, wouldn't you? If partner continues with 2♠ or 2N, your next 3♣ bid now shows the 6-4; if partner bids 3♣ you're also happy, while if you hear a 3♦ rebid you probably don't want to show 4 clubs anyway.

[Cyberyeti]

Frankly, I am surprised anyone is thinking about a NT contract with partner describing a 2 suited hand and my holdings in his presumed weak suits are only Axxx, and Qxxxx. Sure, not both suits are open but one may be and if so the clubs don't have to be running. In other words, it looks like a suit contract is better - at least to me.

 

If partner is 2524/3514 I may well want to play 4N/6N, partner will show extra shape here if he has it, so we're likely to play in a suit opposite 6♥ or 5♣ or 3♦.

[DavidKok]

I suspect you might have missed the part of the first post where 3♣ promised extras.

I don't know why I write such long replies, honestly. It's just more ammo for you to quote out of context. Oh well, once more into the breach...

 

I would open most 11-counts with 5♥4♣ at this vulnerability, so the "14 points" I mentioned are already a king more than a minimum opening. In fact, I'd open a bunch of good 10-counts, even without a sixth heart or fifth club. A lot of pairs place great emphasis on bidding shape, and will for example rebid 3♣ over 2♦ with a hand like ♠x, ♥ATxxx, ♦Kxx, ♣KQJx - the diamonds have improved, you get to show your second suit and 13 points is not, strictly, a minimum. All of these are extras (and it is very reasonable to bid this while simultaneously insisting 3♣ promises extras), but they are not points, and a misfit 13 opposite our lousy 15 does not make a slam. In fact, some partnerships may well rebid 3♣ on ♠xx, ♥ATxxx, ♦A, ♣KJT9x, all the while insisting it shows extras.

 

The first mention of "extras" specifically mentions 6NT, which is far from cold opposite a minimum 3♣ rebid. It would be nice to distinguish, say, 13-point shapely minima from 19-point powerhouses.

 

My second mention of "extras" was in the context of having already shown a non-minimum with 3♣, and I really think suggesting I implied otherwise is pedantic. The relevant question on the 2=5=2=4 hand shape is whether or not we can make 6NT (or possibly 6♥/6♣ in the 7-card fit), which takes far more than a minimum in context of the extras shown by the 3♣ bid. The problem is that partner might have third round rebid issues when trying to show those extra values.

 

The third mention lists 14 as the minimum, and I am specifically worried about missing a fine 6NT if partner is under the old-fashioned impression that we can count on a good 15-count for the 3♣, and hence does not take extra action with an OK 17 or 18. If, however, partner would also bid 3♣ with more shape-oriented hands (all the while still promising extras!), I expect partner to bid 4NT instead of 3NT over 3♠ holding the 17-counts, and I can safely pass 3NT instead.

 

In hindsight I should have just said I would bid 3♠, and let you guess at my motivation. So far I have learned nothing new, and I suspect neither have you, so my efforts have been a pure time sink.

[smerriman]

Yikes, looks like I caught you on a bad day. Wasn't trying to have a go at all - initially read the first two mentions of minimum in the context you intended, but when I got to the point where you asked if 3♣ could be bid on a shapely minimum or whether it shows extras, figured you must have missed the extras bit and went back and reinterpreted the rest.

 

To me (and the OP, based on earlier posts), 'extras' means at least 15 points, so referring to minimums and 14 counts didn't make sense to me.

 

I apologise if I offended you.

[mw64ahw]

Maybe I'm just old fashioned (maybe ) but I have an adverse reaction to using Keycard with an uncontrolled suit. Maybe that's a leftover from years of simple Blackwood.

This was one of the reasons I moved to showing keycards & controls rather than asking for keycards.

 

However In this case if you felt inclined to move above 4♥ then there are no additional Kings to show so a 5♥ bid shows KQ ♥ plus 2 additional keycards. North has controls in all suits so can make the slam decision.

 

Perhaps it would have been better for North to bid 3♠ either denying a stopper for NT or showing a control for the slam try leading to:

3♠ - 4♣ implies KQ ♥(skipping 3NT) rather than 3 small (with Hxx I use Jacoby)

4♦ (♦ control) - 5♥ (slam invite no further Kings to show w. 3 keycards knowing that the ♦ control is in place)

North's choice

 

After the 3♠ bid South has the opportunity to sign-off in 3NT or 4♥

[Winstonm]

2♥ doesn't *promise* 6, but you'd still bid it with virtually all 6-4 hands, wouldn't you? If partner continues with 2♠ or 2N, your next 3♣ bid now shows the 6-4; if partner bids 3♣ you're also happy, while if you hear a 3♦ rebid you probably don't want to show 4 clubs anyway.

2H followed by 3C is weaker than Hearts,Clubs, Hearts. That has been a pretty standard understanding among those I played with and against.

[akwoo]

I bid 3N. Yes this is wimpy, but I have a rather mediocre 15 count. If partner has 18 or even a good 17, surely they'd bid 4N.

 

BTW, 4N here is a quantitative invite in NT for me.