[Echognome]

1) Because 2/1 auctions often flow more smoothly than auctions that start 1♥ - 1♠, I think it's worthwhile to consider allowing for 4-4 black hands (and even to consider all balanced GF hands) a systemic 2♣ response. In my experience, it has not been very difficult to find a 4-4 spade fit after the start 1♥ - 2♣, but some discussions are needed to sort it all out.

2) Even without having made such an agreement, on this particular hand I would bid 2♣ anyway. Josh and Han have made ample arguments why this is so.

[Edmunte1]

2♣ for me

[Fluffy]

jdonn, on Dec 11 2008, 05:12 PM, said:

2♣, I'll go so far as to say I hate hate hate hate hate 1♠. I normally respond 2♣ to 1♥ with this shape when game-forcing anyway, but when you also consider that
- We about 50 stoppers in the minors
- We have some extra values
- The spades are completely terrible
then it's completely irrelevent to miss spades because 3NT will make as well. Meanwhile bidding spades has some huge downsides.
- It will cause partner to completely misevaluate if slam is in the picture, where spade shortness is great and Qxx is awful.
- It will possibly lead us to a bad 3NT if partner is short in spades.

There are also some upsides, well at least one , it will encourage opponents to lead a minor against 3NT.

This is the main reason I would bid 1♠, however, I play too much MP!

[ajm218]

ok - i responded 1♠ at the table and seriously regretted it when partner's 2♥ came back. i then wish i had responded 2♣

Over his 2♥ i thought i was too strong to just bid 4♥ but had no idea what to bid next. I decided to bid 3♣ hating my bid and over partner's 3NT i bid 4♥.

Partner raised to slam and i turned out to be be a very lucky fish when partner had

---

..... I think i will always bid 2♣ on these hands in future...

[kenrexford]

ajm218, on Dec 11 2008, 09:10 PM, said:

ok - i responded 1♠ at the table and seriously regretted it when partner's 2♥ came back. i then wish i had responded 2♣

Over his 2♥ i thought i was too strong to just bid 4♥ but had no idea what to bid next. I decided to bid 3♣ hating my bid and over partner's 3NT i bid 4♥.

Partner raised to slam and i turned out to be be a very lucky fish when partner had

---

..... I think i will always bid 2♣ on these hands in future...

A nice sequence might be:

1♥-2♣
2♥-2NT
3♥

At this point, any call by you except 3NT or 4♥ should be a cue in support of hearts. 4♣ works wonders, if partner thinks this through. If you do not have a bust minimum and do not have a spade control, his stiff spade is probably working. So, he sends back a 4♦ call (whatever that means for you).

Getting to the slam will still be difficult, but not impossible.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Dec 11 2008, 11:31 PM, said:

A nice sequence might be:

1♥-2♣
2♥-2NT
3♥

At this point, any call by you except 3NT or 4♥ should be a cue in support of hearts.  4♣ works wonders, if partner thinks this through.  If you do not have a bust minimum and do not have a spade control, his stiff spade is probably working.  So, he sends back a 4♦ call (whatever that means for you). 

Getting to the slam will still be difficult, but not impossible.

I think given that start it's clear for responder to sign off in 4♥ over 4♦ (he has already cuebid at a time when he didn't have to, and he has 15 with two small trumps), and it's clear for partner to take another call (partner has cuebid and I have a fit for his potential clubs, spade shortness opposite his weakness, and a very strong clue that he signed off due to bad trumps which I can cover). I think what's not clear is what that call should be or how everything should proceed from there.

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Dec 11 2008, 11:53 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Dec 11 2008, 11:31 PM, said:

A nice sequence might be:

1♥-2♣
2♥-2NT
3♥

At this point, any call by you except 3NT or 4♥ should be a cue in support of hearts.  4♣ works wonders, if partner thinks this through.  If you do not have a bust minimum and do not have a spade control, his stiff spade is probably working.  So, he sends back a 4♦ call (whatever that means for you). 

Getting to the slam will still be difficult, but not impossible.

I think given that start it's clear for responder to sign off in 4♥ over 4♦ (he has already cuebid at a time when he didn't have to, and he has 15 with two small trumps), and it's clear for partner to take another call (partner has cuebid and I have a fit for his potential clubs, spade shortness opposite his weakness, and a very strong clue that he signed off due to bad trumps which I can cover). I think what's not clear is what that call should be or how everything should proceed from there.

I think you are right.

I wonder is this would be an auction where Fred would bid 4♠ as a "Last Train" bid, begging partner to ask. EVen if that is the case, will partner read the spade as a stiff? Couldn't Opener have one of the top two hearts and the spade Ace?

Maybe 5♥? Inability to cue anything except hearts?

I don't know either.

[gnasher]

Using natural methods, I think it impossible to reach slam reliably after 1♥-2♣; 2♥-2NT; 3♥. What makes the slam is having a singleton spade opposite four small, but there's no room to distinguish between all of

  x AKQxxx Axx Jxx
  Axx AKQxxx x Jxx
  Ax KQxxxx Ax Jxx

You need to be able to ask for shortage after 3♥. I think this is probably a better use for 3♠ than specifying responder's strength. Having said that, sorting out whether we have extra values is also important, so basically this is a poor hand for natural methods.

[mike777]

ajm218, on Dec 11 2008, 11:32 AM, said:

Partner opens 1♥

Dealer: ????? Vul: ???? Scoring: Unknown

♠ xxxx ♥ xx ♦ KQJ ♣ AKQT

Assuming:
1h=2c=2h=3h(slam try)=ok

granted this seems easy to me but ok......

[FrancesHinden]

For me, responding 1S would have worked well on the hand, because I play 1H - 1S - 2H - 2NT as asking for opener's shortage.

But having said that, while i am usually a 1S responder on a 4=2=3=4, on this hand I bid 2C.

4=3=2=4 is a different problem. At least then you know you have an 8-card heart fit.

[gnasher]

mike777, on Dec 12 2008, 12:57 PM, said:

Assuming:
1h=2c=2h=3h(slam try)=ok

granted this seems easy to me but ok......

That's a way to get you to 3♥. How do you get from there to 6♥?

[Codo]

I see no benefit in this hand in hiding my side 4 card major.
Like Adam I see no convincing way to reach the slam with natural methods, no matter how you try.

The polsih way, that Frances plays too had worked fine:
1 ♥ 1 ♠ 2 ♥ 2 NT 3 ♠ and the hand is huge....

[Codo]

gnasher, on Dec 12 2008, 09:53 PM, said:

mike777, on Dec 12 2008, 12:57 PM, said:

Assuming:
1h=2c=2h=3h(slam try)=ok

granted this seems easy to me but ok......

That's a way to get you to 3♥. How do you get from there to 6♥?

don't talk about the details.

[han]

1H - 2C
2H - 2NT
3H - 4C
4D

seems the normal start. I think responder should now bid 4H and opener should take another call.

I'm with Frances that a shortness ask would work out well, for us it would be something like:

1H-2C (GF, clubs or balanced)
2H-2S (2H is some catch all, 2S asks for further info, usually balanced)
3H-3S (3H shows a single suiter in hearts with extra values, 3S asks for shortness)
4H (exactly 1633)

With opener having shown extra values I think responder clearly has enough to ask for keycards.

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Dec 12 2008, 06:35 AM, said:

You need to be able to ask for shortage after 3♥. I think this is probably a better use for 3♠ than specifying responder's strength. Having said that, sorting out whether we have extra values is also important, so basically this is a poor hand for natural methods.

I play it with Justin. It's been a while but I think we bid
1♥ 2♣
2♦ 2♥
3♦ 3♥

Where 2♦ is a punt (balanced or 6+ hearts), 2♥ is a doubleton, 3♦ is 6+ hearts, and 3♥ asks for shortness.

[cherdano]

Edit.