Bidding problem

[AL78]

MPs, Acol weak NT:

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sakj9hadkt54ckt43&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d1h2c3h]133|200[/hv]

 

Over to you.

[DavidKok]

6♣ seems a favourite to make, the question is what the best way to get there would be while keeping 7♣ and even 6NT live possibilities. I prefer 4♣, provided that my partner doesn't think this is not forcing. 4♥ also gets the message across but that's relying on partner to have a last train bid with 4♠, or we're left guessing over a 5♣ signoff. I'm also eager to find out whether or not partner has the ace of diamonds - we may have to protect the king and hog the hand in notrump.

 

If 4NT were Blackwood that would be a third option, though I don't play this as Blackwood and I wouldn't choose it even if it was.

 

One benefit of 4♣ is that partner can sign off in 4NT by bidding it immediately (natural), although most hands willing to play notrump should have bid 1NT rather than 2♣.

 

Three calls to avoid are 3♠, double and 3NT. If partner bids anything but 3NT over either of the first two options we are ill-placed to show our excellent support, while the third understates our hand and is NF.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

4H.

 

I have no idea, if 4C is forcing or not, ..., at least I make it clear, I want to make 5C.

If partner signs of in 5C I will respect it.

 

I dont like shooting, I may miss slam.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[LBengtsson]

It is a good hand to post, AL78. Would I take 4♣ as forcing here (as DavidKok says)? I do not know but if that are your methods in a competitive auction of this type, then I feel that is the only way to find out whether partner has the right cards for slam to be bid. I would hope that a bid of 4♣ fixes the trump suit, and if the opps. do not bid again, if partner has the ♦A he bids 4♦ next.

 

X followed by 4♥ (if the opps. do not bid) could be another way forward. I do not like a immediate 4♥ bid here as it takes up all the space.

 

And if your system allowed I would not criticize a immediate 4NT RKCB bid that much (though there are hands where it could be wrong) What you want to know is if partner has 2 ace controls and the trump queen.

[DavidKok]

Our rule is that 4m is only NF if we were compelled to bid, i.e. on an auction like (3♠)-X-(P)-?. And even in that situation I think it's bad. Since 4♣ is freely bid here it is forcing, and hence a slam try. Weaker hands with support choose between double (to keep 3NT open), 5♣ (more shape, plus they pay extra for bidding and making game) or pass. It just doesn't pay to bid 4m 'to play, unless you have extras'. Those hands almost always belong in 3NT or 5m.

[AL78]

Three calls to avoid are 3♠, double and 3NT. If partner bids anything but 3NT over either of the first two options we are ill-placed to show our excellent support, while the third understates our hand and is NF.

 

Oops, that is my wrist well and truly slapped. After some thought I bid 3♠ to which partner responded 4♦ and then

. I bid 5♣ in blind hope partner might raise to slam with a good 2/1 hand but she didn't and we played there:

 

[hv=pc=n&s=s53hj85daq76cqj75&w=sq8ht972dj93ca962&n=sakj9hadkt54ckt43&e=st7642hkq643d82c8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d1h2c3h3sp4dp5cppp]399|300[/hv]

 

Partner made 11 tricks for an average minus. No-one bid slam (I was thinking about it throughout the auction but couldn't come uip with a good path) but 5♦+1 and 3NT+1 at a couple of other tables put a dent in our score.

[TMorris]

I think I am more likely to bid the diamond slam - off on the singleton club lead of course, by supporting partner as South with a 2H initial call.

[Cyberyeti]

Again lost it in the play, need to make 5♣+1

[DavidKok]

South should have bid 2♥ on the first round instead of 2♣.

[mikeh]

2C was a very bad bid. Let’s see: partner showed 4+ diamonds. I’m 4=4 minors. Do I have good diamond support? Yes. Do I have 5+ clubs? No

 

Do I know that we have a good diamond fit? Yes

 

 

Does 3C tell partner I have diamonds? No

 

Do I have a game force hand, such that I can bid clubs then bid diamonds? No

 

Can I show diamond support right away? Yes

 

Is there any answer to the above questions that suggest showing my clubs? No

 

Does every answer suggest raising diamonds? Yes.

 

Bridge is a logical game. There are hands and auctions where one can or should be in doubt as how best to proceed but there are many hands where at least the initial action is clear-cut.

 

One of the many problems that beset advancing players is that they don’t think logically…they don’t run through their options, and the meaning of their options, before bidding. As many, many threads in these fora demonstrate far too many players prefer to bid a suit where they might declare (if partner has great support) rather than telling their partner that they already have a fit…in partner’s suit.

 

At the risk of repeating myself, seemingly ad infinitum, with a limited hand….support with support! The only excuses not to show diamonds here would be if one held 4+ spades or 4 diamonds but hearts stopped and a hand suitable for notrump.

 

It’s no wonder that the OP often shows hands in which the bidding went off the rails early. I’m not picking on you, AL…..it’s a very common problem as evidenced by the never-ending posts, by many, showing a reluctance to bid collaboratively. Bridge is a partnership game. Good players don’t just bid their hands in a vacuum. Especially with limited hands, they strain to let partner know that they have a fit, if they do. Why? Primarily because it makes partner’s decisions better-informed.

 

Whether south is worth 2H (if limit raise or better) is an interesting question. I think the answer is yes in a weak notrump method and no in a strong notrump method. It’s even more interesting and difficult if 1D didn’t promise at least 4 diamonds…picture north with a modest 4=4=3=2…not impossible despite the 1H bid. Fortunately, I think, AL played weak notrump, so 2H is the best bid

 

Now north basically drives to 6D: about the only reason not to bid it immediately is the desire to look for grand.

 

Yes, I’m aware that 6D likely fails. So what? Is it a good contract, looking at the NS hands? Yes

 

Deciding that it’s bad bidding to reach a slam that’s well over 60% simply because it happens o fail as the cards lie is ridiculous.

 

Finally, in my partnerships, a voluntary 4m is always forcing in constructive auctions.

[Frank_lol_]

I don't think I can reach slam.

Over a 2D responce, I don't think I will look for slams, expecially when I can't bid a splinter to descfribe my hand. But that's wrong, as 5D is pretty much cold and 6D is possible with a maximum.

I guess I just need to be a better bridge player.

[AL78]

I’m not picking on you, AL…..

 

You're welcome to pick on me, I know you are very solid and instructive in your analysis and at a level that is easy to follow. The last couple of sessions have revealed a weakness in bidding strong hands with slam interest which is at least partly my judgement and partly a lack of confidence partner and I are going to be on the same wavelength if the auction is about to go into uncharted waters. I make an inferior bid that partner definitely won't misinterpret rather than a good bid that partner may misinterpret or not know how to respond to it. Definitely something to think about and work on with one or two of my partners.