Discussion:
Would anyone bid this slam?
(too old to reply)
s***@gmail.com
2018-03-11 13:57:09 UTC
Permalink
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8

Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7

Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?

I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
Will in New Haven
2018-03-11 20:42:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
It's going to be tougher than it should be because opener, hearing the 1S response, is going to tend to mentally put Spade honors in partner's hand.
--
Will in New Haven
https://sites.google.com/site/grreference/
ais523
2018-03-11 22:43:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because
partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
Let's see what information you need from your partner to be able to bid
the slam:

- Q of diamonds
- K of hearts
- 4 clubs, including the Queen (and the Jack raises the chance a lot,
but it's probably worth trying even with just the 10)
- ability to ruff one of your losers (in this hand it's the 4 of hearts
that gets ruffed)

Getting all that information without going too high is going to be very
hard in simple methods. For example, most systems I know that aren't
heavily slam-focused will put a "what are your hearts like?" query at
the 5 or even 6 level, meaning that you can't ask it unless you're
already committed to slam (and are just choosing between small and
grand). If your partner had diamond support then you might be able to
find out about the hearts with a weak-suit game try (which subsequently
turns out to be a slam try), but as it is you're unlikely to even find
the correct strain to play in at a low level, leaving very little room
to look for slams.

I can see a relay system getting to slam here if the opponents didn't
intervene (a typical relay system would know about the 5224 shape
and enough points to make slam viable some time during the 3 level;
then assuming you don't bail out to 3NT, you'll have enough room to
discover that the points are in clubs and not spades before reaching
the 5 level). However, you have 18 points, your partner has 8, leaving
14 points for the opponents, and as they have an 8-card fit in hearts,
there's a decent chance they'll overcall at some point. Oddly, an
overcall might make things easier, as many systems have some way to
show an honour in the opponents' suit.

I've been focusing on the situation with the hearts because many of the
other things you need are easier to show in standard methods. Most
systems will have some way to ask for the Queen of trumps, if they're at
all interested in slam-going. You'll know that the partner has 8-ish
points fairly quickly in almost any system. However, knowing that those
points are in clubs and not spades is very difficult, probably even
harder than knowing that the hearts are under control.

For what it's worth, I tried working out what would happen in some
systems I played. 3NT is possible and likely even probable in more
natural systems, as they're unlikely to identify the spade weakness
(as it happens, it's likely to make; the opponents are fairly likely
to get four spades and nothing else, although quickly winning five
spade tricks is far from impossible as all their finesses will become
certain once you show out of spades).

Trying a (non-relay) system full of slam conventions, the opener (by the
time they had to choose between 5D and 6D) knew that the responder had
8+ HCP (but not much more), 2 or 3 diamonds, 4+ spades (the exact
number wasn't asked for due to the misfit), the Queen of Diamonds, no
Aces, and not the King of Spades. Is that enough information to make
the slam worth bidding? Perhaps you'd do it at matchpoints on the basis
that 5D is unlikely to make more points than 3NT (if 3NT goes down then
5D probably is too), so 6D is unlikely to do worse than 5D and might do
much better. It doesn't seem like a very sound bid, though, because
you're probably assuming your partner has the Queen of Spades, in which
case there's a pretty high chance of a loser in either hearts or clubs
(especially if your partner has only four spades, and thus more
chance of a 4:3 split in the rounded suits). Perhaps the uncertainty
over the number of diamonds might lead to the slam being bid; it's
pretty good if your partner actually has three of them.
--
ais523
judyorcarl@verizon.net
2018-03-11 23:14:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
The system that's best for good opening hands with a long minor is 1972-vintage K-S. Which has big trouble with this hand.

Opener can rebid 3D *forcing*, which is great. Sadly, responder will surely bid 3NT. And opener is bare minimum for the K-S 3D bid.

Instead, opener can rebid 2C *forcing*. Sadly, responder has a no-choice 2S rebid. And now opener is stuck. 2NT and 3D would not be forcing. 3H would be right on strength, but would strongly suggest genuine clubs. 3NT ...

Carl
Steve Willner
2018-03-30 20:40:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by ***@verizon.net
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
I doubt many pairs would reach slam, even with a relay system (despite
Ron's opinion). The absence of wasted values in spades is too hard to
diagnose. A relay system might get there if the 5224 hand is the one
relaying. I suppose any strong club system might stumble into slam if
responder treats the wretched 8-count as a game force opposite a 1C opening.
Post by ***@verizon.net
The system that's best for good opening hands with a long minor is
1972-vintage K-S. Which has big trouble with this hand.
K-S is great, but a claim it's "best" might be hard to substantiate. I
don't see that it has "big trouble" with this hand, though.
Post by ***@verizon.net
Opener can rebid 3D *forcing*, which is great.
It might be great on a different hand, but I wouldn't do it with such
weak diamonds.
Post by ***@verizon.net
Sadly, responder will surely bid 3NT. And opener is bare minimum for the K-S 3D bid.
Responder is max for 3NT but I think in range, so I agree with this part
of Carl's analysis.
Post by ***@verizon.net
Instead, opener can rebid 2C *forcing*.
That would be my choice.

? Sadly, responder has a no-choice 2S rebid.

That would not be my choice. I'd treat spades as a 4c suit and rebid
3C, knowing full well that opener could have as few as two clubs on some
hands. 3C is forcing and shows values; a weak hand has to bid 2S or 3D.

I still don't think we'd get to slam, though. We probably get to 5D.
judyorcarl@verizon.net
2018-03-30 23:58:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by ***@verizon.net
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul
vs non, IMPs)
Post by ***@verizon.net
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
I doubt many pairs would reach slam, even with a relay system (despite
Ron's opinion). The absence of wasted values in spades is too hard to
diagnose. A relay system might get there if the 5224 hand is the one
relaying. I suppose any strong club system might stumble into slam if
responder treats the wretched 8-count as a game force opposite a 1C opening.
Post by ***@verizon.net
The system that's best for good opening hands with a long minor is
1972-vintage K-S. Which has big trouble with this hand.
K-S is great, but a claim it's "best" might be hard to substantiate. I
don't see that it has "big trouble" with this hand, though.
Post by ***@verizon.net
Opener can rebid 3D *forcing*, which is great.
It might be great on a different hand, but I wouldn't do it with such
weak diamonds.
Post by ***@verizon.net
Sadly, responder will surely bid 3NT. And opener is bare minimum for the K-S 3D bid.
Responder is max for 3NT but I think in range, so I agree with this part
of Carl's analysis.
Post by ***@verizon.net
Instead, opener can rebid 2C *forcing*.
That would be my choice.
? Sadly, responder has a no-choice 2S rebid.
That would not be my choice. I'd treat spades as a 4c suit and rebid
3C, knowing full well that opener could have as few as two clubs on some
hands. 3C is forcing and shows values; a weak hand has to bid 2S or 3D.
I still don't think we'd get to slam, though. We probably get to 5D.
After 1D - 1S; 2C - ? in 1972 K-S, failure to rebid 2S specifically denies 5+ spades. No one *likes* rebidding 10xxxx. But without it, you can't reach 4S when opener has KQx x AKxxx Kxxx . (Opener guarantees 15+ hcp on this auction.)

Carl
Steve Willner
2018-04-12 17:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by ***@verizon.net
After 1D - 1S; 2C - ? in 1972 K-S, failure to rebid 2S specifically
denies 5+ spades. No one *likes* rebidding 10xxxx.
Yes. I wrote that I was treating Txxxx as a 4c suit.
Post by ***@verizon.net
But without it,
you can't reach 4S when opener has KQx x AKxxx Kxxx . (Opener
guarantees 15+ hcp on this auction.)
What's wrong with 1D-1S-2C-3C-3S-4S? Opener suggests playing a 4-3 fit,
but 4S should be a good contract if responder bids it. Responder will
bid something other than 4S when holding a weak 4c suit.

s***@gmail.com
2018-03-12 01:26:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Nobody's mentioned my solution.
After 1D 1H, you'd jump to 3C so fast they'd call the director!
Is it an impossible bid over 1S? After all, you have THREE
1st-round controls and THREE 2nd-round controls. Game force is reasonable. You have too much for non-forcing 3D.

1D 1S
3C 4C
4D 5D
6D

With poorer diamonds, or wasted values in spades, partner would have found other bids than 4C or 5D. 6D is bid with confidence. (Vary south hand a little and 6C is the only makable slam!)
Lorne
2018-03-12 10:47:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Nobody's mentioned my solution.
After 1D 1H, you'd jump to 3C so fast they'd call the director!
Is it an impossible bid over 1S? After all, you have THREE
1st-round controls and THREE 2nd-round controls. Game force is reasonable. You have too much for non-forcing 3D.
1D 1S
3C 4C
4D 5D
6D
With poorer diamonds, or wasted values in spades, partner would have found other bids than 4C or 5D. 6D is bid with confidence. (Vary south hand a little and 6C is the only makable slam!)
Your sequence makes no sense.

4D is a cue bid suggesting a club slam so why would partner bypass their
heart control and 4 card support for clubs in order to bid Qx of
diamonds when they think they have a 4-4 club fit and 5-2 diamonnd fit ?

Also over 3C most would be more interested in 3N than a minor suit game
with partners hand.
Charles Brenner
2018-03-13 06:20:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Nobody's mentioned my solution.
After 1D 1H, you'd jump to 3C so fast they'd call the director!
Is it an impossible bid over 1S? After all, you have THREE
1st-round controls and THREE 2nd-round controls. Game force is reasonable. You have too much for non-forcing 3D.
1D 1S
3C 4C
4D 5D
6D
With poorer diamonds, or wasted values in spades, partner would have found other bids than 4C or 5D. 6D is bid with confidence. (Vary south hand a little and 6C is the only makable slam!)
You can make a case but I think it's a post-hoc case.

3C is reasonable but debatable. I'd probably bid it but not happy about either this 5-loser hand committing for 11 tricks or this 18(nice) hcp hand committing for 9 NT tricks.

4C by responder is possible but maybe 3D is better especially if you feel it's right to cater to a 3-card 3C bid.

Luckily the 4D bid was interpreted by South as showing 6D and only 3C - otherwise 5D bypassing 5C was nuts. Therefore given that the partnership is in agreement that 6D and 3C is a lively possibility, better 3D the round before.

The final 6D bid rests on fantasy assumptions. Arguing that South would have bid 3D rather than 4C if holding Jx of diamonds rather than the actual Qx is more convenient than persuasive. Besides that, why shouldn't South hold Jxxx, xxx, Qx, QJ10x?
ais523
2018-03-20 05:15:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charles Brenner
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Nobody's mentioned my solution.
After 1D 1H, you'd jump to 3C so fast they'd call the director!
Is it an impossible bid over 1S? After all, you have THREE
1st-round controls and THREE 2nd-round controls. Game force is
reasonable. You have too much for non-forcing 3D.
1D 1S
3C 4C
4D 5D
6D
[snip]
Post by Charles Brenner
You can make a case but I think it's a post-hoc case.
3C is reasonable but debatable. I'd probably bid it but not happy
about either this 5-loser hand committing for 11 tricks or this
18(nice) hcp hand committing for 9 NT tricks.
4C by responder is possible but maybe 3D is better especially if you
feel it's right to cater to a 3-card 3C bid.
Luckily the 4D bid was interpreted by South as showing 6D and only 3C
- otherwise 5D bypassing 5C was nuts. Therefore given that the
partnership is in agreement that 6D and 3C is a lively possibility,
better 3D the round before.
The final 6D bid rests on fantasy assumptions. Arguing that South
would have bid 3D rather than 4C if holding Jx of diamonds rather than
the actual Qx is more convenient than persuasive. Besides that, why
shouldn't South hold Jxxx, xxx, Qx, QJ10x?
Just out of interest, I tried a relay system (Symmetric Relay) on this
hand to see what happened; after all, those are some of the best
systems for bidding unusual slams. To my surprise, it decided that the
hands were too weak to game force; the responder doesn't have enough
top honours to game force over a "minimum" strong club opening (16+ in
Symmetric), and the opener is too weak to make a second game try
opposite a negative. If the opener upgrades their hand slightly due to
the shape and decides to do a second attempt at a game force
(which would be accepted), they know that the responder has either a
5=2=2=4 or a 7=1=1=4 at the point they have to decide whether to sign
off in 3NT or not. 3NT looks like a pretty promising option opposite
both those hands, and the fact that the auction was struggling to even
reach a game force means that a slam try is unlikely.

So I think I agree with you that the OP's bidding seems somewhat
unlikely here. Why is the opener game forcing over a 1-over-1 response?
They don't have nearly enough strength to even guarantee reaching game,
if there's a misfit (and not only is that plausible from the bidding,
it's true on the actual hand). And why did the responder bypass 3NT?
The spade weakness makes it a slightly dubious contract (partner may
well be relying on your hand for a spade stop when it doesn't really
have one). For what it's worth, I have a slightly different view of the
minor suit situation at the time of the 5D bid; the opener's shown 6-4
in the minors (as it happens, lying slightly about their shape in an
attempt to get the strength across), and so it's up to the responder
to preference to one suit or the other. It's not obvious to me that on
that hand, the 4:4 fit is better than the 6:2 fit, so the responder
picking 5D is at least reasonable. The opener seems to be rather
overstating their hand, though; it's a good hand, but it's not /that/
good, and there's no reason in any of these bidding sequences to think
that the spade singleton helps at all.

Perhaps the best bidding system here would be to have some sort of rebid
from opener showing a strong but not game-forcing hand and encouraging
the responder to make a game try (at which point a "weak suit" game
try showing spades would do the trick). I'm not aware of a system that
has a rebid like that, though.
--
ais523
Co Wiersma
2018-03-20 15:26:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by ais523
Post by Charles Brenner
Post by s***@gmail.com
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Nobody's mentioned my solution.
After 1D 1H, you'd jump to 3C so fast they'd call the director!
Is it an impossible bid over 1S? After all, you have THREE
1st-round controls and THREE 2nd-round controls. Game force is
reasonable. You have too much for non-forcing 3D.
1D 1S
3C 4C
4D 5D
6D
[snip]
Post by Charles Brenner
You can make a case but I think it's a post-hoc case.
3C is reasonable but debatable. I'd probably bid it but not happy
about either this 5-loser hand committing for 11 tricks or this
18(nice) hcp hand committing for 9 NT tricks.
4C by responder is possible but maybe 3D is better especially if you
feel it's right to cater to a 3-card 3C bid.
Luckily the 4D bid was interpreted by South as showing 6D and only 3C
- otherwise 5D bypassing 5C was nuts. Therefore given that the
partnership is in agreement that 6D and 3C is a lively possibility,
better 3D the round before.
The final 6D bid rests on fantasy assumptions. Arguing that South
would have bid 3D rather than 4C if holding Jx of diamonds rather than
the actual Qx is more convenient than persuasive. Besides that, why
shouldn't South hold Jxxx, xxx, Qx, QJ10x?
Just out of interest, I tried a relay system (Symmetric Relay) on this
hand to see what happened; after all, those are some of the best
systems for bidding unusual slams. To my surprise, it decided that the
hands were too weak to game force; the responder doesn't have enough
top honours to game force over a "minimum" strong club opening (16+ in
Symmetric), and the opener is too weak to make a second game try
opposite a negative. If the opener upgrades their hand slightly due to
the shape and decides to do a second attempt at a game force
(which would be accepted), they know that the responder has either a
5=2=2=4 or a 7=1=1=4 at the point they have to decide whether to sign
off in 3NT or not. 3NT looks like a pretty promising option opposite
both those hands, and the fact that the auction was struggling to even
reach a game force means that a slam try is unlikely.
So I think I agree with you that the OP's bidding seems somewhat
unlikely here. Why is the opener game forcing over a 1-over-1 response?
They don't have nearly enough strength to even guarantee reaching game,
if there's a misfit (and not only is that plausible from the bidding,
it's true on the actual hand). And why did the responder bypass 3NT?
The spade weakness makes it a slightly dubious contract (partner may
well be relying on your hand for a spade stop when it doesn't really
have one). For what it's worth, I have a slightly different view of the
minor suit situation at the time of the 5D bid; the opener's shown 6-4
in the minors (as it happens, lying slightly about their shape in an
attempt to get the strength across), and so it's up to the responder
to preference to one suit or the other. It's not obvious to me that on
that hand, the 4:4 fit is better than the 6:2 fit, so the responder
picking 5D is at least reasonable. The opener seems to be rather
overstating their hand, though; it's a good hand, but it's not /that/
good, and there's no reason in any of these bidding sequences to think
that the spade singleton helps at all.
Perhaps the best bidding system here would be to have some sort of rebid
from opener showing a strong but not game-forcing hand and encouraging
the responder to make a game try (at which point a "weak suit" game
try showing spades would do the trick). I'm not aware of a system that
has a rebid like that, though.
8 points is a sign off opposite a strong hand? Hmm....

Now about the strength of the opening hand
It is a 5 loser hand
But by no means an average 5 loser hand
That be
x
Kxx
AKxxxx
KQx
And this is far from a minimum opener
But the actual opening hand is much stronger than this
Not only in points but also in toptricks, and an amazing low number of
direct losers

So the opening hand is in itself worth more then 18 points
Now of cause I see the hand value going down after the 1S response,
but surely not (much) below 18

Co Wiersma
ais523
2018-03-20 22:00:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Co Wiersma
Post by s***@gmail.com
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
[snip]
Post by Co Wiersma
8 points is a sign off opposite a strong hand? Hmm....
Now about the strength of the opening hand
It is a 5 loser hand
But by no means an average 5 loser hand
[snip]
Post by Co Wiersma
Not only in points but also in toptricks, and an amazing low number of
direct losers
So the opening hand is in itself worth more then 18 points
Now of cause I see the hand value going down after the 1S response,
but surely not (much) below 18
I think the opener is worth more than 18, but on the other hand, the
responder is worth less than 8. In the relay systems I looked at, the
responder's hand isn't strong enough to game force against a strong club
opening (it's strong enough to respond, but not strong enough for the
force). Is the opener strong enough to make a second game try opposite a
hand that's uncertain about game opposite a 16-point hand? I think so
(especially if responder hasn't shown spades yet), but at this point
quite a bit of bidding space has been used. For example, in Symmetric
Relay:

1C 1D 16+ points; not strong enough to game force
1H 2C second game try; accept, game force with spades
2D 2H asks whether/if there's a second suit; yes, clubs
2S 3H asks suit length order; S > C > H = D, with 4 clubs

Now what is the opener to do? They've used up all the bidding space
below game purely to establish the responder's approximate shape (which
most relay systems check first). The responder was able to scrape
together a game force upon hearing that the opener's hand was much
better than 16, but there's no reason to think a slam is available. If
the opener makes any bid other than 3NT here, the bidding will go past
3NT. And as the opener, doesn't 3NT look like by far the best contract
on the information available?

If you really really like the opener's hand, we can try the same
auction but with the opener asking a different question on their fourth
bid:

1C 1D 16+ points; not strong enough to game force
1H 2C second game try; accept, game force with spades
2D 2H asks whether/if there's a second suit; yes, clubs
2NT 3NT asks strength; maximum, S > C > H = D with 4 clubs

(In Symmetric Relay, the responder sometimes answers unasked questions
in order to save bidding space, so here they answered the "suit length
order" question unprompted.)

The opener now knows that the responder has either something like 6-7
points with an Ace or two Kings, or 8-9 points mostly in Queens and
Jacks. Perhaps you'd judge that to be worth a slam try; the partner's
Heart shortage is going to be useful, after all. Personally, though, I'd
be imagining at least one trick lost in spades or hearts, and another in
diamonds or clubs, so I'd pass; the slam only works due to the good luck
with the responder's Queens being in the minors (because as soon as you
start relying on, e.g., a finesse in Clubs, the slam becomes less than
50:50 to make). So I'd pass 3NT rather than asking any more questions.
--
ais523
Co Wiersma
2018-03-12 11:47:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1D - 1S
3C - 3H
3NT
Where 3H is 4th suit forcing
That is how the bidding should start
And in my case it would end the bidding
But smarter Southplayers then me may get inspired by the excellent
coverage of the hand and now bid 4C

Co Wiersma
Player
2018-03-21 07:44:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1D 1S 2NT for me. This is an artificial almost 100% gf. I could construct an auction to get to 6, but doubt if we could do this at the table.
Playing a rely system it is dead easy of course.
Player
2018-03-21 07:48:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1C 1H
1S 2H
2S 3C
3D 3H
3S 3N
4C 4N
6D where responder has shown a 5224 shape with nothing in S and one honour in C, H and Ds.
ais523
2018-03-21 22:11:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Player
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial
convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm
especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach
bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1C 1H
1S 2H
2S 3C
3D 3H
3S 3N
4C 4N
6D where responder has shown a 5224 shape with nothing in S and one honour in C, H and Ds.
Which system is that? Do you have an explanation of the bids? Most relay
systems I checked don't manage to show the slam fast enough, so I'm
interested in how yours got there.
--
ais523
Douglas Newlands
2018-03-22 00:26:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by ais523
Post by Player
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial
convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm
especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach
bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1C 1H
1S 2H
2S 3C
3D 3H
3S 3N
4C 4N
6D where responder has shown a 5224 shape with nothing in S and one honour in C, H and Ds.
Which system is that? Do you have an explanation of the bids? Most relay
systems I checked don't manage to show the slam fast enough, so I'm
interested in how yours got there.
Looks like standard sort of relay with DCBs so
1H=spades
1S = relay
2H=clubs
2S=relay
3C=5422
3D=relay
3H= some sort of minimum range specification e.g. 8-11
3S=relay
3N= no spade control
4C=relay
4N= C hon, H hon, D honour, no second club honour
6D= contract

I think there might be a little doubt re HK or HQ but some of those
hands will respond 1D and other will have HJ as well as HQ.

doug
Player
2018-03-22 00:44:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Douglas Newlands
Post by ais523
Post by Player
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial
convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm
especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach
bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1C 1H
1S 2H
2S 3C
3D 3H
3S 3N
4C 4N
6D where responder has shown a 5224 shape with nothing in S and one honour in C, H and Ds.
Which system is that? Do you have an explanation of the bids? Most relay
systems I checked don't manage to show the slam fast enough, so I'm
interested in how yours got there.
Looks like standard sort of relay with DCBs so
1H=spades
1S = relay
2H=clubs
2S=relay
3C=5422
3D=relay
3H= some sort of minimum range specification e.g. 8-11
3S=relay
3N= no spade control
4C=relay
4N= C hon, H hon, D honour, no second club honour
6D= contract
I think there might be a little doubt re HK or HQ but some of those
hands will respond 1D and other will have HJ as well as HQ.
doug
Douggie is mostly right.

2H shows longer S and 4C
3C = 5422 exactly
3D is control point ask, A=3, K=2, Q=1
3H = 8-9 control points
3S = where are they
3NT = nothing or AKQ of A
4C = relay
4N = C H and D. (look at length first, and with = length higher ranking suits first)
ais523
2018-03-22 00:47:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Douglas Newlands
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
[snip: discussion on how well relay systems work on this hand]
Post by Douglas Newlands
Looks like standard sort of relay with DCBs so
1H=spades
1S = relay
2H=clubs
2S=relay
3C=5422
3D=relay
3H= some sort of minimum range specification e.g. 8-11
3S=relay
3N= no spade control
[snip]

Hmm, I'm not sure this is showing the slam fast enough. 3N shows no
spade control, so presumably if there /was/ a spade control, the 3S
question would have driven beyond 3N. Yet if there's a spade control, 3N
is probably the right place to stop! (The slam wouldn't work if
responder's strength were in spades, which is the most likely place for
it to be given what they've shown so far.) So I'm not convinced that 3S
is a safe question to ask here.

Also, what's the minimum strength of the strong club, here? The opener
has more than a minimum for most strong club openings, but they don't
seem to have shown it in the above bidding sequence (unless it's a
sub-game-forcing relay and the fact that the opener is above minimum
is shown via the fact that they continue to relay). Remove, say, the
King of Diamonds from the opener's hand (replacing it with a spot
card), and they're still likely to do a strong club opening. But in
this case, a game-forcing positive from responder has a real risk of
ending up in, say, 3NT down one.
--
ais523
t***@att.net
2018-03-22 04:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by ais523
Post by Player
Post by s***@gmail.com
Playing a simple standard american system, you hold (2nd seat, vul vs non, IMPs)
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8
Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
I'm not really looking for a "just-so" auction, or an artificial
convention that would help -- though those would be interesting. I'm
especially interested in just ordinary hand evaluation and approach
bidding. I wonder if it's unrealistic to hope to get to such a slam.
1C 1H
1S 2H
2S 3C
3D 3H
3S 3N
4C 4N
6D where responder has shown a 5224 shape with nothing in S and one honour in C, H and Ds.
Which system is that? Do you have an explanation of the bids? Most relay
systems I checked don't manage to show the slam fast enough, so I'm
interested in how yours got there.
--
ais523
It's not published. I've been tinkering with it for some years though. It's not a relay system. Short summary:

1NT: 12-14, 2NT: 21-22 3NT: 25-26 (or Gambling)
1x-1y, 1NT: 15-16 1x-1y, 2NT: 17-18 1x-1y, 3NT: 19-20; 1x-2y-2NT: 17-18, 1x-2y-3NT: 19-20
All opening 1-suit bids are canapé. A Reverse shows at least a trick more than an average opening; it shows 4+ card in the first suit and 5+ in the second and AK... or AQ... or KQ... or AJ10.... With a strong hand, a 3+card Minor Suit may be opened. Opener may Jump Shift with a game going hand (obviously improved by the response). Responder uses LTC raises over 1M (2M=9 losers, 3M=8 losers, 4M=7 losers but preemptive, fewer than 10HCP and not two first round controls). 2 over 1 shows 9+HCP and forces to 2NT. The Blue Team 2C-2D convention is allowed too. Void and Singleton Showing Bids; 1S-3NT: singleton and good trumps, 4C relay, suit shows singleton; 1S-4C, etc. shows void and good trumps. This gets the obvious modifications for other suits. A direct 1x-4(x+1) is RKCB. RKCB requires either a jump or it's the first opportunity to bid it 4NT after a cue bid by each partner shows either the A or K of trumps (not both or neither),5NT later shows the other.
Opening 2C: game forcing with ...2D waiting, ...2M at least KJxx and 7HCP and 1QT, 2C-3m is similar with at least QJxxxx, 8HCP and 1.5QT. (QTs are modified, AK=2, AQ=1.5 if in suit bid else, 1. KQ=1 if in suit bid, else 1/2. Kx=1/2 A(x..)=1. 2C-2NT: 8+HCP scattered. 2C-3NT: solid 6+card (0 loser) suit (AKQJxx...) opener's side suit bids are asking. 2C-4C/4D shows 7+card 1-loser suit; 4C shows Hearts, 4D shows Spades. 2C-3H/3S shows the same in Clubs or Diamonds respectively (thus allowing big minor hands to play in 3NT).
2D: Blue Team 2D (4441 17-24HCP) (I'm not sure this is efficient but it generates lots of negative inferences.) 2H/2S: ACOL 2's. (Perhaps weak may be better, but that didn't seem to work as well). Two-way 2 bids may work better or any combination.
t***@att.net
2018-03-22 05:00:05 UTC
Permalink
A couple of other important points: 1M-1NT is forcing thus allowing some strong balanced hands in the 1NT.
Inverted minors.
Jump response shows 6+ card suit and game forcing hand.

I tried using jump response to show 6+card suit 9-11 HCP (about he strength of an old-fashioned 2NT response); a hand useless outside the shown suit. The forcing 6+ hand is shown by bidding and rebidding responder's suit.

1m-1R-1S is forcing but may be made on 4+cards; it's not a reverse.

I'm not sure if some artificial method may work well like ...2C game forcing or the like (or 2C invitational and 2D game forcing.)
t***@att.net
2018-03-22 05:02:51 UTC
Permalink
My next idea is to generate a system with all opening 1 bids natural and forcing. I'm not sure this works but it would be fun.

I'd like to use (modernized) Culberson Asking bids but then canapé may not be as useful; I haven't given it much though.

I got many of the ideas from both the Roman and Blue Team system. The Leghorn Diamond also seems good.
ais523
2018-03-22 06:23:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@att.net
My next idea is to generate a system with all opening 1 bids natural
and forcing. I'm not sure this works but it would be fun.
I'd like to use (modernized) Culberson Asking bids but then canapé may
not be as useful; I haven't given it much though.
I got many of the ideas from both the Roman and Blue Team system. The
Leghorn Diamond also seems good.
It's an interesting idea to have a forcing 1 of a suit. I'm assuming
that the bid would be fairly wide-ranging (unlimited in point count?),
with 2-level bids as either weak or as showing an unusual distribution.

One thing that seems potentially problematic is that the opponents have
much more scope to interfere than normal; the opener's LHO knows they'll
have at least one more chance to bid, and thus can get a lot of
precision in the defence via giving different meanings to delayed and
immediate bids. (My current generic defence against 1-level bids that
are forcing but not necessarily strong, e.g. a three-way 1C bid, is
"1-level bids show opening values, immediate bids above the 1 level are
weak points-wise, delayed bids are more like typical overcalls, e.g.
with less strength but a stronger suit than an opening bid". This is
based mainly on the fact that 1-level interference isn't very good at
pre-empting, so it's better to use it for something constructive.)

This doesn't seem like it's necessarily a deal-breaker (although it
would be an argument against using canapé). I'd expect you to be penalty
doubled at the 2 level more than with regular systems (although that in
itself might be an advantage, letting you make the occasional major suit
game that can't be made any other way!). Having a good counter-defence
system (i.e. making full use of all the available bids, including pass
and double/redouble, to show strength and distribution) is likely going
to be important here.

Perhaps the success of a system like that would be based on what you do
with the opening 2 bids. You have much more scope for interesting things
there than usual, given that the 1 bids are forcing, so perhaps the
extra flexibility at the 2 level will make up for the inevitable issues
at the 1 level.

Incidentally, I don't think the inability to pass 1 of a suit is likely
to be a huge loss; it's very rare for a 1-level opening bid to be passed
out as it is. So the main challenge will be to make sure that the forced
response is more helpful to your partnership than it is to the
opponents.
--
ais523
Player
2018-03-23 03:18:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by ais523
Post by t***@att.net
My next idea is to generate a system with all opening 1 bids natural
and forcing. I'm not sure this works but it would be fun.
I'd like to use (modernized) Culberson Asking bids but then canapé may
not be as useful; I haven't given it much though.
I got many of the ideas from both the Roman and Blue Team system. The
Leghorn Diamond also seems good.
It's an interesting idea to have a forcing 1 of a suit. I'm assuming
that the bid would be fairly wide-ranging (unlimited in point count?),
with 2-level bids as either weak or as showing an unusual distribution.
One thing that seems potentially problematic is that the opponents have
much more scope to interfere than normal; the opener's LHO knows they'll
have at least one more chance to bid, and thus can get a lot of
precision in the defence via giving different meanings to delayed and
immediate bids. (My current generic defence against 1-level bids that
are forcing but not necessarily strong, e.g. a three-way 1C bid, is
"1-level bids show opening values, immediate bids above the 1 level are
weak points-wise, delayed bids are more like typical overcalls, e.g.
with less strength but a stronger suit than an opening bid". This is
based mainly on the fact that 1-level interference isn't very good at
pre-empting, so it's better to use it for something constructive.)
This doesn't seem like it's necessarily a deal-breaker (although it
would be an argument against using canapé). I'd expect you to be penalty
doubled at the 2 level more than with regular systems (although that in
itself might be an advantage, letting you make the occasional major suit
game that can't be made any other way!). Having a good counter-defence
system (i.e. making full use of all the available bids, including pass
and double/redouble, to show strength and distribution) is likely going
to be important here.
Perhaps the success of a system like that would be based on what you do
with the opening 2 bids. You have much more scope for interesting things
there than usual, given that the 1 bids are forcing, so perhaps the
extra flexibility at the 2 level will make up for the inevitable issues
at the 1 level.
Incidentally, I don't think the inability to pass 1 of a suit is likely
to be a huge loss; it's very rare for a 1-level opening bid to be passed
out as it is. So the main challenge will be to make sure that the forced
response is more helpful to your partnership than it is to the
opponents.
--
ais523
In Fantunes all 1 level bids are forcing.
Steve Willner
2018-03-30 20:50:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by ais523
It's an interesting idea to have a forcing 1 of a suit. I'm assuming
that the bid would be fairly wide-ranging (unlimited in point count?),
with 2-level bids as either weak or as showing an unusual distribution.
Fantunes uses this approach. EHAA is similar, but the one-bids are not
forcing though are unlimited. I've often played unlimited but
non-forcing one-bids in K-S or other 5cM context.

I don't see why the one-bids, except _possibly_ 1C, need to be forcing.
Post by ais523
One thing that seems potentially problematic is that the opponents have
much more scope to interfere than normal; the opener's LHO knows they'll
have at least one more chance to bid,
This is a serious downside, but I doubt many opponents have taken full
advantage.
Post by ais523
(My current generic defence against 1-level bids that
are forcing but not necessarily strong, e.g. a three-way 1C bid, is
"1-level bids show opening values, immediate bids above the 1 level are
weak points-wise, delayed bids are more like typical overcalls, e.g.
with less strength but a stronger suit than an opening bid".
With that hand, why didn't you preempt on the first round?
Post by ais523
This is
based mainly on the fact that 1-level interference isn't very good at
pre-empting, so it's better to use it for something constructive.)
That I agree with.
Post by ais523
Perhaps the success of a system like that would be based on what you do
with the opening 2 bids. You have much more scope for interesting things
there than usual, given that the 1 bids are forcing, so perhaps the
extra flexibility at the 2 level will make up for the inevitable issues
at the 1 level.
And also that.
Post by ais523
Incidentally, I don't think the inability to pass 1 of a suit is likely
to be a huge loss; it's very rare for a 1-level opening bid to be passed
out as it is. So the main challenge will be to make sure that the forced
response is more helpful to your partnership than it is to the
opponents.
I think inability to pass is a significant, though probably not huge,
loss. Limiting responder's hand early is a big advantage. If opener
has an unbalanced hand, no matter how strong, it will be rare for the
deal to be passed out. The only problem situation is when opener has a
strong _balanced_ hand, and those can be put into the 1C opening and/or
natural NT bids of various ranges.
t***@att.net
2018-03-21 16:37:27 UTC
Permalink
♠ 7
♥ A84
♦ AK8654
♣ AK8

Partner has
♠ T9632
♥ K7
♦ Q7
♣ QJT7
Six diamonds and six clubs are excellent contracts (mainly because partner >has no wasted values in spades). Do you get to slam?
Looking at my natural canapé system and being a bit optimistic gives (mostly by luck):

1C (canapé, 3-card OK with strong hand into higher suit) 1S (natural)
2D (Forcing, NGF especially with minors) 4C (strong Club support; get to raise QJ of Clubs to 4pts and raise Q7 to 2. Partner has indicated 4C & 5+D so there arediscards.
4D (Cue) 4H (Cue)
5D (Cue denies 1st round S but doesn't bit H to indicate 2nd Round) 6C (DQ worth a trick and partner isn't interested in S contron)
Loading...