Another modest 5-5 hand

[pescetom]

MP

[hv=pc=n&s=sk93haj764dk98ck2&n=saq852h2dt5caqt83&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1sp]266|200[/hv]

 

How would/should this auction proceed in your preferred system (2/1, Acol or whatever)?

Opponents will remain silent throughout.

[AL78]

With my Acol partners:

 

1♠ - 2♥

2♠ - 4♠

Pass

 

It will probably go the same way with my 5CM (not 2/1) partners. There is a remote possibility of a 5♣ cue after which I think we'd stop in 5♠. It's hard to be objective seeing both hands together.

[DavidKok]

I'm having a hard time judging the value of the South hand, especially with the North hand visible. The two plausible auctions in my system are:

 

1♠-2NT (fit, limit raise or minimum game force); 4♠ (to play)-P

1♠-2♥; 3♣ (we bid good 5-card suits)-3♠ (by implication: at least a slam try); 4♣ (control)-4♦ (control); 4♠ (not even enough for Last Train after the enthusiastic 3♣)-P

[mw64ahw]

For me the 5-5 suit gives me enough distributional strength to start the slam sequence after South has shown Extras.

 

1♠-2♥ I've started putting the non-limit 3 card raises through 2/1 leaving the Jacoby equivalent as 4+card limit+ raises

2♠ short ♥ unlimited - 3♦ 3+♦ guard 13+hcp

3NT-4♠ given North can ruff ♥

4NT 2KCs - 5♣ ♣ control continued slam interest (i.e. 2 keycards)

6♠ my combined modified loosing trick count is working

 

Perhaps on a less reckless day I bid 5♠ to deny the ♦ control, and South then has the choice of whether to slam or not

[mikeh]

This is a hand on which it’s easy to overbid to the poor but not-hopeless slam…it needs 3-2 trump and the diamond ace onside so it a bad contract

 

1S 2H. Gf

2S 3S. Some slam interest, may be (as here) mild

4C. Cue bid. Definitely willing to cooperate. Doesn’t promise strong interest

4D. Normal

4H. Borderline. Shortness in partners primary suit isn’t as valuable as, say, Kx.

 

Now responder has a tough choice. 4S would be saying ‘I’ve made slam moves but I can’t afford the five level unless you have more than you’ve described so far’. That’s a conservative view with the club king yet unshown, but the trumps aren’t great, the heart suit won’t likely be worth much if the 4H bid was shortness and the diamond King is Kxx.

 

If responder did move,imo think should be 5C. Now opener bids an easy 5S and that’s where we end. Not as good as 4S but far better than slam…even though slam may make.

 

Fwiw I’m pretty sure that both my partnerships would likely reach 5S.

[Douglas43]

With my Acol partners:

 

1♠ - 2♥

2♠ - 4♠

Pass

 

It will probably go the same way with my 5CM (not 2/1) partners. There is a remote possibility of a 5♣ cue after which I think we'd stop in 5♠. It's hard to be objective seeing both hands together.

 

At favourable I'd open 1♣

 

1♣ - 1♥

1♠ - 2♦*

2♠ - 4♠

 

South could bid 3♠ with serious slam interest

[Cyberyeti]

With my Acol partners:

 

1♠ - 2♥

2♠ - 4♠

Pass

 

It will probably go the same way with my 5CM (not 2/1) partners. There is a remote possibility of a 5♣ cue after which I think we'd stop in 5♠. It's hard to be objective seeing both hands together.

 

Curiously the addition of the ♠10 would completely change our auction.

 

We open 1♣ and rebid 2♠ over 1♥ with this hand type, but the spade suit is not quite good enough (3 of top 5 honours in both suits not QJ10, not a huge hand NF).

 

We would likely duplicate your auction.

[Cyberyeti]

At favourable I'd open 1♣

 

1♣ - 1♥

1♠ - 2♦*

2♠ - 4♠

 

South could bid 3♠ with serious slam interest

 

Any reason N doesn't have AQJxx, x, x, Axxxxx on this sequence ? and would you expect him to bid on ? slam is decent opposite that, great if partner has ♠10.

[LBengtsson]

My dime's worth. Modest + modest = modest. 12 + 14 = game values, not slam

[pescetom]

My dime's worth. Modest + modest = modest. 12 + 14 = game values, not slam

"Seven losers each" said my partner dismissively.

Yet as mikeh points out, find ♦A onside and it probably makes slam.

That's why I found this combination intriguing, and preferred to show the two hands right away rather than attempt a progressive which has more ramifications than contributors.

It's perched right on the natural system sore spots of opener rebidding distribution or strength and handling two opening+ hands.

[DavidKok]

I think the South hand is a lot weaker than it looks, to the point that I think it perches on "minimum game force" instead of "slam try". In my system the two hand types have different first-round responses, and if South decides that hand is a minimum game force that's the end of slam investigation. Bid your games quickly and your slams scientifically.

 

Even if South decides this is a slam try (14 HCP, almost all aces and kings, and a 5-card side suit) my 2/1 auction does not get too close to slam. Showing shape immediately with a decent 5/5, instead of rebidding the catchall 2♠ (which I strongly dislike here, especially since clubs is such a low ranking suit) allows opener to put on the brakes later when the slam gadgets come out to play (notably, last train). The North hand is worth a lot of tricks opposite support for both black suits, while slow values in the red suits are near worthless. This is pertinent information to share with partner if you want to have a sensible slam investigation. And, once informed, South can visualise the issue on a diamond lead through the K98, plus it is far from guaranteed that both black suits will run. I think this board is not very complicated provided you keep your eyes on the prize.

 

As an aside, generally slams need to be 50% or so before they are worth bidding (at both IMP and MP scoring). Since we need an onside ace of diamonds as well as some good breaks in spades and something not awful in clubs (and no first round ruff in a red suit, of course) I would be happy to stay out of this slam. In fact, even 5♠ is in trouble if the diamond ace is offside!

[pescetom]

At favourable I'd open 1♣

 

1♣ - 1♥

1♠ - 2♦*

2♠ - 4♠

 

South could bid 3♠ with serious slam interest

That's what I was hoping for as true Acol :)

 

 

With my Acol partners:

 

1♠ - 2♥

2♠ - 4♠

Pass

It will probably go the same way with my 5CM (not 2/1) partners.

That is actually what I would expect from most 5CM 2/1 partners, and indeed what the robot bid.

 

 

1♠-2NT (fit, limit raise or minimum game force); 4♠ (to play)-P

Fair enough, that's one reason why I did not ask about rebids over 2♥.

 

1♠-2♥; 3♣ (we bid good 5-card suits)-3♠ (by implication: at least a slam try); 4♣ (control)-4♦ (control); 4♠ (not even enough for Last Train after the enthusiastic 3♣)-P

One of my current partners would die rather than not bid a good 5-card suit, so we would both rebid 3♣ here and sort out the strength situation later if necessary and possible.

 

 

1S 2H. Gf

2S 3S. Some slam interest, may be (as here) mild

4C. Cue bid. Definitely willing to cooperate. Doesn’t promise strong interest

4D. Normal

4H. Borderline. Shortness in partners primary suit isn’t as valuable as, say, Kx.

 

Now responder has a tough choice. 4S would be saying ‘I’ve made slam moves but I can’t afford the five level unless you have more than you’ve described so far’. That’s a conservative view with the club king yet unshown, but the trumps aren’t great, the heart suit won’t likely be worth much if the 4H bid was shortness and the diamond King is Kxx.

 

If responder did move,imo think should be 5C. Now opener bids an easy 5S and that’s where we end. Not as good as 4S but far better than slam…even though slam may make.

Probably how it would go with my best partner. I agree that a 4H control-bid with singleton in partner's suit is borderline in terms of opportunity. I do think however that (at least at I/A level) it should be either obligatory (as I play) or excluded (as many do): leaving it up to judgement seems dangerous, although I understand that at expert level that might work out.

[pescetom]

I think the South hand is a lot weaker than it looks, to the point that I think it perches on "minimum game force" instead of "slam try". In my system the two hand types have different first-round responses, and if South decides that hand is a minimum game force that's the end of slam investigation. Bid your games quickly and your slams scientifically.

 

Even if South decides this is a slam try (14 HCP, almost all aces and kings, and a 5-card side suit) my 2/1 auction does not get too close to slam. Showing shape immediately with a decent 5/5, instead of rebidding the catchall 2♠ (which I strongly dislike here, especially since clubs is such a low ranking suit) allows opener to put on the brakes later when the slam gadgets come out to play (notably, last train). The North hand is worth a lot of tricks opposite support for both black suits, while slow values in the red suits are near worthless. This is pertinent information to share with partner if you want to have a sensible slam investigation. And, once informed, South can visualise the issue on a diamond lead through the K98, plus it is far from guaranteed that both black suits will run. I think this board is not very complicated provided you keep your eyes on the prize.

 

As an aside, generally slams need to be 50% or so before they are worth bidding (at both IMP and MP scoring). Since we need an onside ace of diamonds as well as some good breaks in spades and something not awful in clubs (and no first round ruff in a red suit, of course) I would be happy to stay out of this slam. In fact, even 5♠ is in trouble if the diamond ace is offside!

 

I don't think anyone has expressed serious interest in slam, either in comments or suggested auction.

I agree that South is weaker than it looks, at least as support in spades (NT has some potential from South's point of view, and I was surprised that nobody discussed this yet).

How South evaluates the situation depends partly upon the noises from North.

I agree that there is a case for showing shape immediately rather than languishing in a catchall 2♠, hence the post.

[mikeh]

I think the South hand is a lot weaker than it looks, to the point that I think it perches on "minimum game force" instead of "slam try". In my system the two hand types have different first-round responses, and if South decides that hand is a minimum game force that's the end of slam investigation. Bid your games quickly and your slams scientifically.

 

Even if South decides this is a slam try (14 HCP, almost all aces and kings, and a 5-card side suit) my 2/1 auction does not get too close to slam. Showing shape immediately with a decent 5/5, instead of rebidding the catchall 2♠ (which I strongly dislike here, especially since clubs is such a low ranking suit) allows opener to put on the brakes later when the slam gadgets come out to play (notably, last train). The North hand is worth a lot of tricks opposite support for both black suits, while slow values in the red suits are near worthless. This is pertinent information to share with partner if you want to have a sensible slam investigation. And, once informed, South can visualise the issue on a diamond lead through the K98, plus it is far from guaranteed that both black suits will run. I think this board is not very complicated provided you keep your eyes on the prize.

 

As an aside, generally slams need to be 50% or so before they are worth bidding (at both IMP and MP scoring). Since we need an onside ace of diamonds as well as some good breaks in spades and something not awful in clubs (and no first round ruff in a red suit, of course) I would be happy to stay out of this slam. In fact, even 5♠ is in trouble if the diamond ace is offside!

I think that a hand with 5 controls, a reasonable primary fit, a possible ruffing value and a suit that may be establishable opposite say Qx or Kx is far…FAR….to good to conclude, before partner gets ANY say in the auction, that this is a ‘minimum game force’.

 

Collaborative bidding means exchanging information before rushing to judgement.

[DavidKok]

Partner can still make slam tries opposite a minimum game force, it just requires a good 16+ or so. The North hand with an extra king or ace would qualify.

[apollo1201]

Late in the thread but it seems it will be a dialogue like

 

S - I have extras and we could go to slam (some kind of forcing raise at one stage, e.g. 3S after a 1S-2H-3C or 2S start)

N - I’m definitely wanting to collaborate (4C)

S - I’m continuing to collaborate (4D, which could also mean I do not quite have enough to rush into BW even knowing you are ok on your side)

N - I have done enough noise (4H or 4S), please go on if you can

S - me too (4S or pass), and starting to get worried about the D lead that we’ve gently telegraphed to the opps

 

The bids might be different depending on methods but the overall tone would remain similar.

 

But we’ve all been in worst slams that made, haven’t we? Or better ones that went down…

[Cyberyeti]

"Seven losers each" said my partner dismissively.

Yet as mikeh points out, find ♦A onside and it probably makes slam.

That's why I found this combination intriguing, and preferred to show the two hands right away rather than attempt a progressive which has more ramifications than contributors.

It's perched right on the natural system sore spots of opener rebidding distribution or strength and handling two opening+ hands.

 

I don't use LTC but the N hand looks more like 5 losers than 7

[pescetom]

I don't use LTC but the N hand looks more like 5 losers than 7

Not my cup of tea either, but yes it would be 5 with traditional counting.

Maybe he adds something to compensate for the Qs and the known hearts misfit, or maybe he was just fishing for excuses for not responding with a control-bid :)

[thepossum]

I don't use LTC but the N hand looks more like 5 losers than 7

 

Maybe 6 the way I count :)

 

Regarding the hand that is usually a "Jacoby" 2NT for me - who knows what happens after - if anyone explores for slam or not

 

1S-2NT (either 3H or 4C) etc

[Cyberyeti]

Maybe 6 the way I count :)

 

Regarding the hand that is usually a "Jacoby" 2NT for me - who knows what happens after - if anyone explores for slam or not

 

1S-2NT (either 3H or 4C) etc

 

I think there's a good case for Jacoby requiring 4 card support, imagine AQxxx, x, Qx, AQxxx opposite the actual S hand and Kxxx, AJxxx, Kx, Kx, the second is a really good slam, just requiring trumps 2-2, or trumps 3-1 and clubs 3-3 or 4-2, the first pretty much requires clubs 3-3. The ninth trump makes a hell of a difference, and knowing about it immediately is really useful.

[pescetom]

I think there's a good case for Jacoby requiring 4 card support, imagine AQxxx, x, Qx, AQxxx opposite the actual S hand and Kxxx, AJxxx, Kx, Kx, the second is a really good slam, just requiring trumps 2-2, or trumps 3-1 and clubs 3-3 or 4-2, the first pretty much requires clubs 3-3.

 

Talking about the clubs, on the actual layout most people seemed to pull all trumps and run AKQ of clubs. Maybe I'm resulting or missing something, but wouldn't it be better to pull two rounds of trumps leaving the J out and then ruff the third club?

 

(On a diamonds 3 lead West took A and Q and continued with the 2. Pulling trumps, West contributed T4 and East 76).

[thepossum]

I think there's a good case for Jacoby requiring 4 card support, imagine AQxxx, x, Qx, AQxxx opposite the actual S hand and Kxxx, AJxxx, Kx, Kx, the second is a really good slam, just requiring trumps 2-2, or trumps 3-1 and clubs 3-3 or 4-2, the first pretty much requires clubs 3-3. The ninth trump makes a hell of a difference, and knowing about it immediately is really useful.

 

I appreciate there is a reason why Jacoby requires the 4th trump but occasionally I like to take a risk :) - especially if I think 2NT is a decent bid

That's why I play "Jacoby" 2NT

I understand there is a risk of missing better heart fit

[pescetom]

I appreciate there is a reason why Jacoby requires the 4th trump but occasionally I like to take a risk :) - especially if I think 2NT is a decent bid

That's why I play "Jacoby" 2NT

I understand there is a risk of missing better heart fit

 

We play a 2NT response in an uncontested auction as a 3+ card invite, 3M being weak 4 card support: Opener can Checkback with 3♣ to enquire about 3/4 card support and shortage/shape.

Responder with a game force fit would bid 2/1 then 3M.

Fairly typical in North Europe.

Probably not ideal, but better than Jacoby in my experience.

[mikeh]

We play a 2NT response in an uncontested auction as a 3+ card invite, 3M being weak 4 card support: Opener can Checkback with 3♣ to enquire about 3/4 card and shortage/shape.

Responder with a game force fit would bid 2/1 then 3M.

Fairly typical in North Europe.

Probably not ideal, but better than Jacoby in my experience.

We’ve looked at modifying our forcing raise structure but concluded that we’d lose quite a bit in terms of albeit low frequency descriptive rebids by opener, since the partnership is basically forced to waste some valuable bidding space clarifying degree and strength of the fit shown by responder. Plus in one partnership, we’ve given up on the weak jump raise. It rarely results in a good score…often, especially if red, we’re down 200 against nothing or a partscore. So we lump it into 1N or a single (semi constructive) raise…the 4th trump with some shortness seems to work ok. 1M 3M is mixed.

 

Obviously it’s a question of balancing pros and cons, including how effective your J2N structure is. In one partnership it’s fairly simple (but far better than ‘standard which, imo, is not very good at all) and in the other it’s complex.

 

Since we design our methods for imps, and accurate slam bidding is far more an imp issue than a mp one, we don’t want to give up the low frequency but powerful J2N structure. And we really don’t want to give up on finding better fits, hence there is no way I’d ever play a forcing raise with 3 card support.

[DavidKok]

I recently read John Montgomery's system notes on Revision, a modern strong club system. It contains many new and good ideas and excellent explanations of them. I'm very happy to personally be playing the system pescetom describes, and I think it is superior to Jacoby-esque 2NT bids. But for people interested in discussions on J2N I can highly recommend pages 63 through 69 of the major suit structure of those notes (I'm not kidding, the whole system is 451 pages and the major suit openings document consists of 96). Available at https://bridgewithdan.com/resources/.