Slam bidding guidance needed

[AL78]

I have played in half a Swiss Pairs local club event and we were doing well before the snow came down and the decision was made to halt the event (some people who have a fair distance to travel on country roads were getting anxious). This hand came up on the second round which was awful because we don't have a robust system in place for slam investigation:

 

Acol, 3 weak twos, weak NT:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s86h9863dt82cat72&w=sqt7hakqjt5dkq5cq&n=sk52h72dj974ck654&e=saj943h4da63cj983&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=p1hp1sp3dp4np5sp6nppp]399|300[/hv]

 

South finds the low club lead and they take the first three tricks.

 

I was West. My plan was that bidding 3♦ on my second turn establishes a game force and if partner bids 3♥, I can bid 3♠ to show delayed support, then we might find a good major suit slam. We however end up in the hopeless slam. My interpretation of partner's 4NT bid was RCKB in diamonds, although it is debatable whether 4NT here should be RCKB or quantitative. The problem seems to be that the way the auction has gone, I cannot show a powerful hand with secondary spade support. Can you suggest a way to take this a bit more slowly and advise on whether there are general rules on when 4NT should be Blackwood and when it should mean something else.

[LBengtsson]

if your 3♦ establishes a game force, why on earth did your partner take the reins and bid 4NT, whatever interpretation it gives? 3♠ or 3NT would have been better. You did not open 2♣, you opened 1♥. Partner's 4NT is just a crash bang wallop bid guessing the final contract.

[Cyberyeti]

This is the classic BW death hand type issue, you can at least partially solve it as we do by using a gadget 2N to show a game force then describe. You don't really want to be in a slam here at all in spades, it's worse than 50:50 (2 rounds of clubs and you might not be able to pick up ♠Kxxx onside, but slam is much closer to 50:50 in hearts).

 

We would bid:

 

1♥-1♠

2N(GF unbal)-3♣(semi forced)

3♥(good heart suit)-3♠(5+ spades)

4♣-4♦(all cues 1/2, initially spades agreed)

4♥(cue)-4♠

4N-5♥(keycard, 2 without)

pass or 5♠

 

Whatever 4N is, I would suggest 5♠ is a reasonable response, and I think 4N should be quantitative and partner should pass 5♠ if he doesn't bid 6♠.

[DavidKok]

4NT should be quantitative here, but I'm afraid many people will think it is Blackwood for diamonds. With such partners I prefer to agree to not play Blackwood at all - not because there is anything wrong with the convention, but because that is the only way to stop them from jumping all over the place.

Despite the club length East clearly doesn't have a 4NT bid (even if it were Blackwood) - the hand is too weak by about an ace and doesn't have a fit. If 4NT were quantitative and 5♠ showed the fragment (it would for me) choosing 6NT is crazy, 6♠ is a better guess.

 

Your hand is a classic problem hand - very strong with a 6-card opening suit and 3-card support for partner's major. Advanced systems reserve artificial calls to show exactly this hand type. Most bidding systems just refer to this as the 'Bridge world death hand' (if I'm not mistaken) and make opener choose the smallest lie. 3♦ is very reasonable here.

Personally I play Gazzilli on this auction which might have won some bidding space, but given East's bidding would perhaps not have saved you.

 

For the record: on the auction shown East should choose between 3♠ (my choice) or 3NT (maybe with better clubs or slower values) over 3♦.

[apollo1201]

You complain about your bad résults. But you can’t win when you play 1 against 3 whereas the rest of the room plays 2 against 2.

 

Partner, despite having a promising hand on your GF with 2 A, doesn’t have a clue of where and how high the contract should be played. Because so far no known fit exists, and a suite is wide open.

 

You could have a strong semi balanced hand, a monster 2-suiter, a single H suiter or a strong S fit and a semi-natural D suit.

 

In all cases, 4NT should not be BW for D, they can unambiguously be agreed with 4D. It should therefore be natural, positive, quantitative, with strong black stoppers and no real enthousiasm with H and D.

[DavidKok]

[...]

 

Whatever 4N is, I would suggest 5♠ is a reasonable response, and I think 4N should be quantitative and partner should pass 5♠ [..].

So some hand is worth a slam try, but when partner shows a maximum with a fit we better stop in 5? I don't think this auction is allowed to exist, what if opener has significant extras and might want to try for 7?

[mikeh]

Tough hand

 

I hate 3D….but I’d hate most other calls even more. 4 queens and a Jack cause the 4321 count to overvalue the hand at 19, all the more so with that stiff club queen. Adding to the problem is the lack of a second ace…of course, the prevalence of quacks explains the very unusual 19 count with only one ace and two kings.

 

Having said that, it’s tough to downgrade this to a 3H bid or an imaginative Al Roth type of 2D ‘marking time’ bid, so I’m ok with 3D.

 

Your partner has zero clue about bidding. You can’t ever get consistently good results with partners who don’t understand the fundamentals of constructive bidding. As Apollo said, 3D established a game force and your partner needs to understand that that allows for cheap descriptive bidding.

 

I think east has two reasonable choices. 3N might well be the best spot….picture x AKQJxx KQxx Kx

 

However, 3S is the better call, imo. Opener can always bid 3N with the type of hand where 3N is probably best and meanwhile responder’s 3N should kill any 5-3 spade contract…opener can almost never correct 3N to 4S

 

Also, over 3S, opener might be bidding four of either red suit….a 4D bid should get east excited, although the best continuation is unclear to me.

 

As it happens, 3S is raised to game. And east has another close call. I think that with those two aces and expecting something along the lines of Kxx AKQxx KQJx x east has to make a move…I’d cuebid 5D since keycard may not help….what if partner invented the 3D with KQx AKQJx KJx xx? Maybe unrealistic since that looks like a 2N opening bid😒

[Cyberyeti]

So some hand is worth a slam try, but when partner shows a maximum with a fit we better stop in 5? I don't think this auction is allowed to exist, what if opener has significant extras and might want to try for 7?

 

What hand can he have ?

 

I don't think 5♠ shows a max with a fit, I think 5♠ says that he thinks 5♠ may be a better contract than 4N and invites 6 opposite longer spades.

[DavidKok]

Running to a potential Moysian with a minimum when 4NT was an offer to play opposite a minimum seems unwise. If spades are really better partner was in a position to offer an alternative instead of bidding 4NT.

[Cyberyeti]

Running to a potential Moysian with a minimum when 4NT was an offer to play opposite a minimum seems unwise. If spades are really better partner was in a position to offer an alternative instead of bidding 4NT.

 

3640 could well be better in the moysian, but is quite unlikely to be one if you're not playing 2/1, if you're worth 4N you're almost certain to be worth a 2♣ response if 4135 or a 4♦ raise if 4144 so that leaves 4234 and you might take it slowly on that to find out if partner has a 6th heart or a 5th diamond.

[akwoo]

My rule is that 4N is quantitative unless you have agreed a suit. This is not the rule for most beginning and intermediate players, but I insist on it unless partner is at least close to as good as me; then I'm willing to bend.

 

Whether it's quantitative or RKCB for diamonds, 4N is a terrible bid. It hearkens back to the days of spoken bidding when you had to get to your contract quickly because otherwise you'd forget the bidding from 2 rounds ago.

[AL78]

My rule is that 4N is quantitative unless you have agreed a suit...

 

Thanks, it has just occurred to me that this would a better rule than assuming 4NT is always Blackwood. In the circles I play the latter is pretty much universal. The partner in question here is open to discussion and taking on new things so I will suggest this to her.

[DavidKok]

Since it's still on topic: I play a different rule. "4NT is not keycard asking if we have a slam try in the suit at a lower level". This is very much not standard, since it also implies that most jumps to 4NT are not Blackwood (for example: 3♥-4NT, but even 1♥-2♥; 4NT or 2♣-2♦; 2♥-3♥; 4NT), but it rarely loses. If we really have slam interest keeping the bidding low is almost always beneficial. Plus, with the hands that just want to know key cards we can still ask on the next round, so the losses are slim even if we get the perfect Blackwood hand. I'm not sure that I would recommend this to your partner, but it is very playable and shows just how overused jumps on slam auctions are.

[thepossum]

Bridge seems far too complicated these days

 

I'm just forcing in hearts and seeing if we get past game

 

I would even consider 2C opening and my suit is hearts. What do you reckon partner

 

I can't see getting far past game without getting into trouble

 

However a positive spade allows you to show a fit and who knows

 

2C-2S-4NT-etc

2C-2S-3H-3S-etc

2C-2S-3H-3NT-4S-etc

2C-2S-3H-3NT-4NT(?)- etc

 

Establish the game force with bid 1 anyway. Then you know you are headed to game at least and most likely a spade slam

 

 

 

EDIT Just tried that with basic Acol in Q-plus and ended up in trouble. What is it with partners and jumping straight to the wrong slam

However all is not lost 2C-2s-3s WORKS Most other routes end in 5S

[mw64ahw]

This is the sort of result I have playing with random partners. In this case partner knows my strength and primary suit and thinks they have enough for a slam try. I have a self sustaining suit so bid 6♥ over a nebulous 4NT to make a point. If corrected to 6NT I've done my best.

 

Much easier with a regular partner playing 2/1 GI with Kaplan Inversion.

[tazbierek]

the 4NT here is problem.

with my partner we would bid : 1♥ - 1♠ here 3♦ is looks good , but partner should bid 3♠ showing 5spades. 4S to establish fit spade, and here if partner bid 4NT then u will show 1Key card and u know that it ends on 5♠

[tazbierek]

Tough hand

 

I hate 3D….but I’d hate most other calls even more. 4 queens and a Jack cause the 4321 count to overvalue the hand at 19, all the more so with that stiff club queen. Adding to the problem is the lack of a second ace…of course, the prevalence of quacks explains the very unusual 19 count with only one ace and two kings.

 

Having said that, it’s tough to downgrade this to a 3H bid or an imaginative Al Roth type of 2D ‘marking time’ bid, so I’m ok with 3D.

 

Your partner has zero clue about bidding. You can’t ever get consistently good results with partners who don’t understand the fundamentals of constructive bidding. As Apollo said, 3D established a game force and your partner needs to understand that that allows for cheap descriptive bidding.

 

I think east has two reasonable choices. 3N might well be the best spot….picture x AKQJxx KQxx Kx

 

However, 3S is the better call, imo. Opener can always bid 3N with the type of hand where 3N is probably best and meanwhile responder’s 3N should kill any 5-3 spade contract…opener can almost never correct 3N to 4S

 

Also, over 3S, opener might be bidding four of either red suit….a 4D bid should get east excited, although the best continuation is unclear to me.

 

As it happens, 3S is raised to game. And east has another close call. I think that with those two aces and expecting something along the lines of Kxx AKQxx KQJx x east has to make a move…I’d cuebid 5D since keycard may not help….what if partner invented the 3D with KQx AKQJx KJx xx? Maybe unrealistic since that looks like a 2N opening bid😒

thats the way i think , i know many people will say this hand is game forcing but imo it seems logic to bid 1H 1S 3H with this hand, but 3D would be my second choice

[Douglas43]

Playing no gadgets, I'd consider 1♥ - 1♠ - 4♥. That shows a really good Heart suit and a hand short of a 2♣ opening that has been improved by partner's response (Hxx or HHx is a typical holding). Don't know whether partner should bid on (I would probably chicken out in their shoes) but 6M is on a finesse, so either outcome is OK.

[nullve]

Practical vanilla 2/1 auction:

 

2N(1)-3♥(2)

3♠(3)-4♣(4)

4♠(5)-4N(6)

5♦(7)-5♠(8)

P

 

1) 20-21 BAL

2) 5+ S

3) usually 2-3 S

4) 4+ C, slam interest

5) usually 3 S

6) RKC

7) 1 or 4 key cards

8) sign off

[DavidKok]

This is what happens when you show the full hand. People start reclaiming preemptive bids and hiding solid 6-card major suits just to show they would obviously have gotten this correct.

[nullve]

This is what happens when you show the full hand. People start reclaiming preemptive bids and hiding solid 6-card major suits just to show they would obviously have gotten this correct.

In my case it's because I've been in this position a zillion times before. Haven't you?

[Cyberyeti]

This is what happens when you show the full hand. People start reclaiming preemptive bids and hiding solid 6-card major suits just to show they would obviously have gotten this correct.

 

I felt the 2N opener was absurd also, and 1♥-1♠-4♥ was a hand just too good to open 4♥ but similar in shape

[mw64ahw]

Practical vanilla 2/1 auction:

 

2N(1)-3♥(2)

3♠(3)-4♣(4)

4♠(5)-4N(6)

5♦(7)-5♠(8)

P

 

1) 20-21 BAL

2) 5+ S

3) usually 2-3 S

4) 4+ C, slam interest

5) usually 3 S

6) RKC

7) 1 or 4 key cards

8) sign off

I find the ♠ fit playing Kaplan Inversion, but will show the self-sustaining ♥ suit first on a keycard basis.

This shouldn't leave me with the issue of being able to set ♠ as trumps if I want to revert over a 3NT response, but a subsequent 3♠ from partner could be a recipe for confusion.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

As already pointed out, 4NT was what?

3D did not deny a 3 card spade suit, hence 3S, ..., you can explain to me,

that 3NT is better, but with 2 Aces, and an unbal. hand, I would bid 3S

showing my hand, and do I really want to play NT Jxxx vs. x after the

marked club lead?

 

After 3S you may end up at the 5 level or 6 level playing spades,

which may or may not make.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[akwoo]

Bridge seems far too complicated these days

 

Look - if you're willing to give up about 10% on average you can simplify a lot. Some sessions the hands don't give much of a benefit to more sophisticated methods and you're only giving up 2%, and then you can make up for that with good cardplay.

 

I'm not willing to give up 10% on average.