[Jlall]

BAM

T9xx A AK9x KJ8x, you deal, opps don't bid.

1D 1H
1S 2C(art GF)
2N 3D
3H 4H
5C

Wasn't sure how I bid this hand, was mainly wondering about 5C instead of 5D, but if you have comments on 3H or 2N those are welcome.

[jdonn]

Slightly prefer 3♣ to 2NT, only because I think it shows 4 clubs not because I expect it to work out a ton better.

Like 3♥.

Like 5♣.

It's always hard to get into a slam auction where you have nothing in one of your suits, but you did the best you can with it I think.

[fred]

Hard to comment sensibly without knowing more about your system and style, but why not 3C instead of 2NT?

4H sounds very non-forcing to me. Assuming you agree then I assume you didn't Pass 4H either because you thought partner would be expecting a doubleton heart from you or because you thought that chances for slam were good. Assuming it was slam you were thinking about then 5C seems better than 5D to me because, in these uncharted waters, 5D could reasonably be interpreted as "I don't want to play 4H, let's play 5D" - it might not sound like a hand with slam interest.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Siegmund]

I like 2NT. I like 3H too if it's a cuebid after we've agreed on diamonds for a slam exploration. Given partner's 4H bid, um, I don't think that's what partner thinks it 3H was. (If that IS what partner thinks it is, he didn't cue 3S or 4C back at me, and we are off some cashing black tricks and we may be in a pass-and-hope-partner-makes it situation.) Best guess here is that partner is 2-6-4-1 with barely a game force, got excited when I showed a big heart, and is trying to steal an extra 20 points.

If we aren't going to pass 4H I feel we have to go back to 5D, not 5C, since there's no reason to think we actually have a club fit.

Are there any understandings about your slam exploration style in this kind of auction we should be aware of?

[Jlall]

fred, on Dec 27 2009, 08:15 PM, said:

Hard to comment sensibly without knowing more about your system and style, but why not 3C instead of 2NT?

4H sounds very non-forcing to me. Assuming you agree then I assume you didn't Pass 4H either because you thought partner would be expecting a doubleton heart from you or because you thought that chances for slam were good. Assuming it was slam you were thinking about then 5C seems better than 5D to me because, in these uncharted waters, 5D could reasonably be interpreted as "I don't want to play 4H, let's play 5D" - it might not sound like a hand with slam interest.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Hi Fred,

Yes I definitely took 4H as an offer to play, and I was always pulling because the 5-1 (or poor 6 card suit 6-1) did not appeal. I think I showed a doubleton heart with 3H. I bid 5C rather than 5D to show a good hand and no spade control, but wasn't sure if my hand was really worth it (obviously the CA instead of CKJ would be much better).

I bid 2N rather than 3C because my stiff heart was stiff A. I just felt like showing a stiff or a void in hearts when I had stiff A would cause a misevaluation.

As far as system/style, it is a first time partnership with a well known expert (Brian Glubok), we played a natural system and had few agreements, so basically I was just trying to describe my hand as well as I thought I could.

[Winstonm]

I am in the 3C camp also, but only because I believe 2N can cause some confusion about the meaning of the 3H bid if you are not in a real tight partnership.

At the point of the 3H bid the auction sounds a lot like this to me: KJxx, Kx, AKxx, xxx

The 3C bid fixes that problem - then it is certain partner is cue bidding 4H instead of looking for the best game.

I didn't see this when I answered:

Quote

I bid 2N rather than 3C because my stiff heart was stiff A. I just felt like showing a stiff or a void in hearts when I had stiff A would cause a misevaluation.

I think that is quite good thought but IMO bidding out shape does not infer the lack of honors in the shortness as much as I believe splinter should. (This goes to my belief repeated often that splinter is better as an exclusion-type bid. Your mileage may vary.)

[xcurt]

i thonk all your choices were reasonable but the result isn't very satisfactory. if i had to guess i would say your bam equity is well under 50% now if partner has some x54x or x64x minimumish gf. there is something to be said for giving partner 3C and then 3H over 3D or 4H over 3H, particularly at this form of scoring. this slightly understates the hand, but assuming you have good teammates and your strong partner your bam equity against most teams in the field is probably well over 50% if the board is decided on the play and defense to 3nt or the decision to play 3nt or 4h. even in the 2-day nyc bam which is where im guessing this hand was played.

[nige1]

Jlall, on Dec 27 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

BAM ♠ T9xx ♥ A ♦ AK9x ♣ KJ8x, you deal, opps don't bid.
1D 1H
1S 2C(art GF)
2N 3D
3H 4H
5C
Wasn't sure how I bid this hand, was mainly wondering about 5C instead of 5D, but if you have comments on 3H or 2N those are welcome.

IMO, FWIW, from a position of ignorance of 2/1 ...

• Prefer 1N rebid to 1♠, downgrading hand to 14HCP in view of apparent misfit. (With 20/20 hindsight, also prefer not to introduce a poor suit into an auction with slam potential).
  
• Prefer 3♣ to 2N.
  
• Admire 3♥ bid.
  
• Over 4♥, prefer Pass to 5♣ and wouldn't consider 5♦. Presumably you have shown extra values (or doubt) by bidding 2N rather than 3N over 2♣.

[Phil]

I kind of like this auction. I agree with 2N - because for 3N, I want it played from my side but for slam (presumably 6♣), I'd rather pard protect his spade holding and pard can try 3♣ if that's the case. Protecting the hand on lead should take priority to mindlessly patterning.

3♥ seems like a sensible nudge and 5♣ should confirm you didn't hold Hx in hearts and are interested in 6, but obviously don't have a spade card.

[bluecalm]

Yup, 2nt promises 2H for me too. Actually it comes up quite often. Good to discuss.
If I somehow end up bidding 2NT I bid 3nt now. Too big a chance to end up in somethign very silly after 3H. Partner may have : KQx KQJxx Jxxx x for example and wants to check club holding...

[gnasher]

I might have had the same auction, but I'd be feeling uncomfortable about the way it's developed.

In my world, the primary message of 2NT is "I have a club stop". I don't think it either promises or denies a doubleton heart. It might be any of 4153, 4243 or 4252.

I think using 3♣ as natural is a waste of a bid, but if it's available I think you should use it. A well-defined bid is better than an ill-defined bid, and you may get a chance to show ♥A on a later round anyway.

Over 3♦, I can't see any alternative to 3♥, which keeps open the possibility of 3NT without insisting upon it.

4♥ is clearly to play. If partner has xx KQ10xx QJxx Ax, we've done really well but should stop now. If he has five better hearts we're probably OK in 5♥; if he has a singleton spade we probably have a slam on. I suppose that means we should move, and that means 5♣.

[Jlall]

gnasher, on Dec 28 2009, 04:57 AM, said:

I might have had the same auction, but I'd be feeling uncomfortable about the way it's developed.

Yeah that's why I posted it, I kinda hated my auction but it didn't seem unreasonable.

I don't see why you would need or want to bid 2N with 4153/4252, I would be happy to bid 2D when I had 5 diamonds. We have room for partner to bid 2M now, and we can show our club stopper later usually. Bidding 2D with those hands obviously makes your 2D bid less well defined, but I would rather be bidding 2D much more often than 2N anyways. 4243 with no club stopper is a problem hand, there are obviously artificial solutions to that hand type (bid 2D or 2S), but none are standard. I would usually bid 2H with that, I don't think dedicating 3C to that is better than having 3C show 4 clubs.

[Fluffy]

I don't think I'd bid 5♣, 4441 is not so great, and we already showed a positive (I think) with 2NT rather than 3NT. If we also shown clubs stopped partner will think that ♣K is present. I think 5♦ is a better bid now.

I also prefer 3♣ over 2NT

[pooltuna]

Jlall, on Dec 27 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

BAM

T9xx A AK9x KJ8x, you deal, opps don't bid.

1D 1H
1S 2C(art GF)
2N 3D
3H 4H
5C

Wasn't sure how I bid this hand, was mainly wondering about 5C instead of 5D, but if you have comments on 3H or 2N those are welcome.

Well the way the bidding has gone it kind of makes you wish you had started with 1NT Count me as a 3♣ preference vote as well.

[fred]

Jlall, on Dec 28 2009, 10:27 AM, said:

gnasher, on Dec 28 2009, 04:57 AM, said:

I might have had the same auction, but I'd be feeling uncomfortable about the way it's developed.

Yeah that's why I posted it, I kinda hated my auction but it didn't seem unreasonable.

I don't see why you would need or want to bid 2N with 4153/4252, I would be happy to bid 2D when I had 5 diamonds. We have room for partner to bid 2M now, and we can show our club stopper later usually. Bidding 2D with those hands obviously makes your 2D bid less well defined, but I would rather be bidding 2D much more often than 2N anyways. 4243 with no club stopper is a problem hand, there are obviously artificial solutions to that hand type (bid 2D or 2S), but none are standard. I would usually bid 2H with that, I don't think dedicating 3C to that is better than having 3C show 4 clubs.

The way you do things makes a lot of sense to me playing "standard". I handle this very differently (and it is very non-standard so not really relevant, but some may find it interesting).

For me 2C is used either as a game force or a weak preference to 2D - opener will almost always bid 2D regardless of what his hand looks like. 2D instead is a constructive preference. The main advantage of this method is that it splits up the wide-ranging 2D preference in two.

This is more important for me than it would be in standard because, for me, 1S always shows an unbalanced hand - it will deliver a 5-card diamond suit unless 4144. As such, I tend to want to go back to 2D more than those who rebid 1S whenever they have 4 spades.

But even before I played this weird convention, the way I handled this auction was very different. The basic idea is to assume that opener has shown a 5-card diamond suit already so bidding 2D over 2C strongly suggests a 6-card suit.

Also, it was completely normal for us to bid 2H over 2C with honor-doubleton. IMO there is a lot to be said for sometimes doing this in "standard" as well, even on some 4243 hands that contain a (non-positional) club stopper.

So the way your auction started 1D-1H-1S-2C-2NT-3D could easily be based on a shape like x63x and, when the auction continues 3H-4H, it would be unthinkable for responder to bid again with 4144 unless he had a very strong hand. Responder would "never" bid this way with a 5-card heart suit.

Probably my previous post was partly colored by 15 years of brainwashing that has resulted from playing methods like those described above. For example, it did not even occur to me that responder might have a 5-card heart suit in the auction you present so I certainly would have passed 4H with your hand (especially at BAM). I do agree that, playing "normal" methods, 4H with a strong 5-card suit is possible.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[mikeh]

Nothing much to add, but currently killing a little time by posting, so adding my 2 cents worth.

I would prefer 3♣ rather than 2N..... then when I bid 3♥ over 3♦ (assuming that is what happens) I can easily and comfortably pass 4♥....yes, I would be a little on the heavy side, but I'd not be at all unhappy given my black suits. I don't think it at all unreasonable to forsee the way the auction has developed....obviously, 3♣ might end up causing complications on some forseeable continuations as well, so I sympathize with 2N.

Another possible reason for 3♣ is that if partner continues 3♥, we have a wonderful hand and can cue (4♦ or 4♣?) over it, without fear that he was expecting Ax in hearts..... thus if he has KQ10xxx, he'd be enouraged to think heart slam after 2n and not after 3♣, but with KQJxxx he'd evaluate accurately after 3♣ then cue-bid. I am not suggesting this reasoning as worth much but it does seem to be an additional little edge for the natural 3♣ call.

I had also wondered if your methods had so far allowed you to limit your strength but assumed that they had not...altho I sense that you will have denied a 15-17 4=2=4=3 or any 4=2=5=2 (no easy 2♦ rebid which maximizes space). But if you could still have 4=2=4=3 18-19, wouldn't there be some risk that partner will take 5♣ as that hand type, worried about spades? Of course, almost any hand that will go to slam over that call will usually offer you the chance of playing diamonds rather than hearts anyway....or have hearts strong enough that the 5-1 works on a 4-3 trump break...and I would expect a 5♦ preference, rather than 5♥, on most hands not driving to slam. I think we hold enough minor cards that he won't overbid with a stiff spade very often.

[gwnn]

question to everyone:

can 3♣ be xxxx or does it promise a stop also?

[jdonn]

gwnn, on Dec 28 2009, 07:43 PM, said:

question to everyone:

can 3♣ be xxxx or does it promise a stop also?

I certainly wouldn't want to bid notrump with short hearts and xxxx of clubs. If I was 4054 there is a good chance I would just bid 2♦ (I play these auctions essentially the Justin way not the Fred way even though I disagree with Justin on this hand). If I was 4144 I would suck it up and bid an unhappy 3♣.

[Siegmund]

In at least one of my regular partnerships, 3♣ on this auction almost has to be xxxx, because we would show the stopper with 2NT otherwise. It comes up very rarely - but that's as it should be, for a bid that burns up extra space.