The slam that wasn't there

[AL78]

In contrast to missing a cold slam because I should have taken a better view and cuebid instead of trying to sign off, here is one we bid that wasn't there.

 

[hv=pc=n&w=sat2hakq83dkca832&e=sqj7h2dq9765ckqj6&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1dp1hp2cp2s(FSF)p2np6nppp]266|200[/hv]

 

I was East. The spade finesse works which gets me to 11 tricks but I couldn't find a 12th. If I hadn't received a heart lead I could have tried a red suit squeeze after the opps take their ♦A (which as it turns out wouldn't have worked anyway). 6♣ is there. How would you get to it, or would you get to it?

[LBengtsson]

In contrast to missing a cold slam because I should have taken a better view and cuebid instead of trying to sign off, here is one we bid that wasn't there.

 

My sorry for saying this, AL78, the one bid that wasn't there (imo) is your opening 1♦ bid. Opening a vulnerable 1 honour trick, aceless minor suit 11 point hand in second position with 1♦ when a opponent has passed, even though you have an easy rebid with 2♣ is not constructive.

 

Other than this in the actual auction, your partner can bid 3♣ after 2NT (if your partner's 2♠ bid is GF), which will probably lead to him suggesting 5NT later as pick a slam, and you will then go for the 4-4♣ fit given the misfit.

[DavidKok]

I'd have opened 1♦, even at second and unfavourable. But I can definitely understand passing, and I expect that to be the majority opinion. 6♣ looks playable to me, I'm not sure why you two chose 6NT. Maybe it was the quadruple jump. Also: swap the jack of spades for the ace of diamonds (while keeping the shape the same) and I'd like to be in 7 - how were you ever going to get there?

 

I would have bid 3NT over 2♠, suggesting partner stop bidding.

[nullve]

How much the hand above and this average-looking 10 count are worth, using some different evaluators.

[Cyberyeti]

Easy 1♦ opener in any seat except 4th.

 

1♦-1♥

2♣-2♠(not GF)

2N-3♣(GF now)

3N(bad hand, nothing much to say)-4♦(kickback)

4♠(1/4)-4N(Q?)

6♣(yes but nothing else worth talking about)

 

5 diamonds to the QJ10 say would be enough to justify a 5N "I have stuff of interest but no kings" instead of 6♣

[eagles123]

In contrast to missing a cold slam because I should have taken a better view and cuebid instead of trying to sign off, here is one we bid that wasn't there.

 

[hv=pc=n&w=sat2hakq83dkca832&e=sqj7h2dq9765ckqj6&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1dp1hp2cp2s(FSF)p2np6nppp]266|200[/hv]

 

I was East. The spade finesse works which gets me to 11 tricks but I couldn't find a 12th. If I hadn't received a heart lead I could have tried a red suit squeeze after the opps take their ♦A (which as it turns out wouldn't have worked anyway). 6♣ is there. How would you get to it, or would you get to it?

 

there is simply no need to leap to 6N, we could have no slam at all, we could be cold for 7C ... 6N is an unnecessary wild guess when there's plenty of space to have a more sensible and accurate bidding sequence. I don't think I really want to be in it anyway, seems like quite a lot of work to do before we make 12 tricks if the spade hook is off. and if south leads a spade to 6C, which I think they probably should, it puts us to a decision straight away.

 

could imagine a sequence like

 

1D - 1H

2C - 2S

2N - 3C

3N - 4N

 

all pass

[mycroft]

I would open the East hand playing North American Strong NT 2/1. I would not with my K/S weak NT partner, even if I have a legitimate rebid (I'm imagining 1♦-(2♥) and partner playing me for more in, say, 3♥x). But it's borderline, even there.

 

I agree with most that 2NT-6NT is the biggest issue; given a GF 2♠ call, 3♣ seems almost automatic. Why hide from partner the thing that makes your hand so good in context (as opposed to the things that you don't like, like AKQxx into shortness and Axx into less-useful-points stopper)? Then, if you play 5NT "pick-a-slam", partner with this hand can bid 6♣ and with actual tricks in diamonds can try 6NT (or 6♦ converted to 6NT).

 

Sure, resulting. Sure - 4-1 club break probably dooms 6♣, too, and at best it's on a finesse (and possibly a heart break!) But if you GF and then don't use the space you've given yourself - especially if you GF and then don't tell partner your fit - you're telling partner he doesn't matter.

 

And hey, sometimes he doesn't. I like blast auctions. I really like blast auctions, especially those that can make the lead somewhat blind, and where that might matter. I blast a lot. But here, you don't know about anything - 6? 7? suit? NT? - and you have the tools and the room to get information or an opinion from partner. Not doing so seems unhelpful.

[DavidKok]

How much the hand above and this average-looking 10 count are worth, using some different evaluators.

I've never understood the point of evaluators like this. Are you allowed to use these at the table? I would also open the second hand - does that prove anything?

[mikeh]

Opening as east or passing is simply a question of style.the key point is that if your partnership opens these hands then west has to be very conservative. 6C is a poor contract, and it’s the only slam with a realistic chance

 

Why is that? It’s because the west hand isn’t strong enough (!) to drive to slam in a partnership in which the east hand is an opening bid.

 

Obviously, as others have pointed out, the 6N was very silly. Not only did it commit to a terrible contract, with no obvious reason why west should be visualizing 12 winners, but it also negated an easy grand had opener had, for example, Kx x Axxxx KQxxx

[AL78]

I would have bid 3NT over 2♠, suggesting partner stop bidding.

 

I thought 3NT would show 1.5 or 2 stops, not a single stop.

[Stephen Tu]

I thought 3NT would show 1.5 or 2 stops, not a single stop.

 

Jumping to 3nt would have been weird. It has nothing to do with holding extra stoppers in the 4th suit or not. Normally it's used to show range. When partner shows an artificial GF, normally you use a jump in NT to show extra values along with a stop in the 4th suit, and no fit for partner's suit, approximately 16-17 for most people. With less or more you just bid 2nt (bidding on over 3nt with 18+).

 

A "fast arrival" style where jump to 3nt to show a minimum hand is flawed in two ways. #1, you burn bidding space on a very common hand type and take away partner's ability to use the 3 level to explore for game in another strain and/or slam. It's not as bad with 16/17 having extras, because with the extras 3nt will usually just make on raw power, and also makes it more likely to take same tricks as say an alternative major suit game if you are playing MP. #2, if 2nt just shows extra values, it is merging the 16-17 with 18-19 (and higher) ranges, so it creates this wider contiguous range that is more difficult for partner to deal with than a split range where they can just assume the lower range and deal with the higher range later.

 

[nullve]

I've never understood the point of evaluators like this. Are you allowed to use these at the table?

The evaluators:

 

"

CCCC

The Kaplan-and-Rubens evaluator.

HCP

The standard high card points sometimes called the Milton Work point count, where Ace=4, King=3, Queen=2, Jack=1.

Binky Notrump and Suit

The results of my hand evaluation research.

Fifths

The Fifths evaluator is an evaluator which adjusts standard HCP slightly, removing one fifth from the value of kings and queens and adding two fifths for tens. It might or might not work better for determining whether to bid 3NT or not.

BUM-RAP

Alex Martelli's adjustment to work point count, which seems good for suit contracts. A=4.5, K=3, Q=1.5, J=0.75, T=0.25.

Bissell

Closely related to losing trick count, Bissell's evaluation dates from 1936. (If you subtract Bissell from 39 and divide by three, you get a rough losing trick count.)

"

 

All of them certainly allowed at the table.

 

I would also open the second hand - does that prove anything?

It suggests, but does not prove, that you are not a walrus. (Which is good.)

[DavidKok]

A "fast arrival" style where jump to 3nt to show a minimum hand is flawed in two ways. #1, you burn bidding space on a very common hand type and take away partner's ability to use the 3 level to explore for game in another strain and/or slam. It's not as bad with 16/17 having extras, because with the extras 3nt will usually just make on raw power, and also makes it more likely to take same tricks as say an alternative major suit game if you are playing MP. #2, if 2nt just shows extra values, it is merging the 16-17 with 18-19 (and higher) ranges, so it creates this wider contiguous range that is more difficult for partner to deal with than a split range where they can just assume the lower range and deal with the higher range later.

The auction 1♦-1♥; 2♣-2♠*; 2/3NT shows exactly a 3=1=5=4, 3=0=6=4 or 3=0=5=5, and the latter two hand types will frequently rebid a minor suit at the 3-level instead. Partner doesn't need to look for a different strain - partner is captain. We show our hand, partner places the contract (or bids 4m natural slam try). Discouraging investigation is precisely the point - we have a garbage hand on the auction, so we need to send a discouraging signal. Presumably 2♣ already rules out "18-19 (and higher)" ranges. I don't see the problem here - we're in a game force with a limited hand and about to finish describing our shape. Fast arrival is on.

 

I thought 3NT would show 1.5 or 2 stops, not a single stop.

This makes many hands unbiddable, I think. 4SF is an asking bid, and our goal should be to inform partner of our shape, our strength and whether we have a stop in the fourth suit. If we demand 1.5-2 stops in the fourth suit we may have to give up on the first two, which I think is too high a cost. Put differently: which game would you like to be in on the auction, if partner has a minimal 2♠* bid and we only have a single stop? I think 3NT is by far the best spot, now that we are in a game force.

[Stephen Tu]

The auction 1♦-1♥; 2♣-2♠*; 2/3NT shows exactly a 3=1=5=4, 3=0=6=4 or 3=0=5=5, and the latter two hand types will frequently rebid a minor suit at the 3-level instead. Partner doesn't need to look for a different strain - partner is captain. We show our hand, partner places the contract (or bids 4m natural slam try). Discouraging investigation is precisely the point - we have a garbage hand on the auction, so we need to send a discouraging signal. Presumably 2♣ already rules out "18-19 (and higher)" ranges. I don't see the problem here - we're in a game force with a limited hand and about to finish describing our shape. Fast arrival is on.

18 is certainly possible. 19 may or may not, depending on style, if you respond light maybe there are some soft 19s that don't want to GF immediately on the second round, or maybe you like to play 1d-1h-3c as guaranteeing 5-5. (Or maybe you play a style with 2c 1 round force ala K-S). 2254 shape is also possible, although that's style dependent, maybe honor placement dependent. The range is at least 11-18.

 

I just don't see any *advantage* of jumping to 3nt to discourage. Just bid 2nt then 3nt for the same effect. Let partner show a minor fit at the 3 level or extra self-sufficient hearts, give him extra bids to work with. Now he gets both 3c/3d and jumps to 4c/4d, instead of only natural slam tries. Maybe now you can use kickback effectively. Like if partner wanted to set diamonds as trumps then bid 4H kickback, this works a ton easier than if you had bid 3nt. Or if he wants to hear some cue bids from you over 3m.

 

I really don't see any of the bidding theorists advocating fast arrival in NT. Most hate fast arrival in general.

 

This makes many hands unbiddable, I think. 4SF is an asking bid, and our goal should be to inform partner of our shape, our strength and whether we have a stop in the fourth suit. If we demand 1.5-2 stops in the fourth suit we may have to give up on the first two, which I think is too high a cost. Put differently: which game would you like to be in on the auction, if partner has a minimal 2♠* bid and we only have a single stop? I think 3NT is by far the best spot, now that we are in a game force.

You can get to 3nt just as easily over 2nt and have it still be discouraging. What's the rush? Why rob partner of options?

[AL78]

18 is certainly possible. 19 may or may not, depending on style, if you respond light maybe there are some soft 19s that don't want to GF immediately on the second round, or maybe you like to play 1d-1h-3c as guaranteeing 5-5. (Or maybe you play a style with 2c 1 round force ala K-S). 2254 shape is also possible, although that's style dependent, maybe honor placement dependent. The range is at least 11-18.

 

For me personally (I play Acol and 5CM but not 2/1), I won't jump-bid on a new suit unless I have a good 18+ count where game has a fair shot opposite a minimal response. One of my partners, however, has bid 1suit followed by 3new suit on as little as a mediocre 17 HCP earlier this week, and we ended up in 3NT on a combined 23 count.

 

I think some people are scared to open 1D/H/S followed by a new lower ranking suit at the two level with 16-17 HCP in case partner passes with an 8-9 count and they miss a good 3NT. If I am responding with that strength, I will strain to find another bid just in case partner has bid at the two level with not quite a GF hand, ideally I will give them a courtesy raise. The problem is, jump bidding in a new suit at the three level takes up so much space, it can easily shaft a minimal partner in the auction if you don't have the power to tolerate being put into 3NT opposite a 6-7 count.

[LBengtsson]

Opening as east or passing is simply a question of style.the key point is that if your partnership opens these hands then west has to be very conservative. 6C is a poor contract, and it’s the only slam with a realistic chance

 

Why is that? It’s because the west hand isn’t strong enough (!) to drive to slam in a partnership in which the east hand is an opening bid.

 

Obviously, as others have pointed out, the 6N was very silly. Not only did it commit to a terrible contract, with no obvious reason why west should be visualizing 12 winners, but it also negated an easy grand had opener had, for example, Kx x Axxxx KQxxx

 

A very good point. The West hand is immediately thinking 'SLAM' if East opens, and when East shows a second suit where there's a fit, it is then like '6/7 level here we go!!!' I used to play a Precision system with a 3♦+ and 10-15 opening. Because opening could be only 10, partner had to apply brakes sometimes. Yes, it is a matter of style whether to open these hands in 2/1 or SAYC, but partner should be aware you open lighter and poorer and apply brake if that is so.

[Cyberyeti]

A very good point. The West hand is immediately thinking 'SLAM' if East opens, and when East shows a second suit where there's a fit, it is then like '6/7 level here we go!!!' I used to play a Precision system with a 3♦+ and 10-15 opening. Because opening could be only 10, partner had to apply brakes sometimes. Yes, it is a matter of style whether to open these hands in 2/1 or SAYC, but partner should be aware you open lighter and poorer and apply brake if that is so.

 

Partner has literally THE worst possible hand consistent with the auction, I have no issue with driving to slam, 6♣W is still decent although you will get there from the E hand which is less good on a spade lead. Consider he could easily have either red jack which makes things much better.

[mikeh]

‘Literally THE worst possible hand’?

 

KQJ J QJxxx Kxxx

 

I doubt you’d win many bidding contests for reaching 6C. Heck, make clubs KJxx and slam is far below 40%.

 

6N is pretty good though😀 for either construction

 

So make it KQJ x QJxxx Kxxx.

 

A better hand than your ‘literally THE worst possible hand’ yet any slam is woeful. KQJ x QJxxx KJxx still better yet slam is poor.

[Cyberyeti]

‘Literally THE worst possible hand’?

 

KQJ J QJxxx Kxxx

 

I doubt you’d win many bidding contests for reaching 6C. Heck, make clubs KJxx and slam is far below 40%.

 

6N is pretty good though😀 for either construction

 

So make it KQJ x QJxxx Kxxx.

 

A better hand than your ‘literally THE worst possible hand’ yet any slam is woeful. KQJ x QJxxx KJxx still better yet slam is poor.

 

I meant in context of 1 keycard plus the Q♣, we can stop in 5♣ opposite that.

[Douglas43]

The thing I would take away from this is to have a clear agreement over when Fourth Suit Forcing is game-forcing. If you don't play FSF at the two level as game forcing (and I don't) then you must agree that if the FSF bidder bids again, it is GF.