[mrdct]

---

I held the South hand yesterday and managed to stumble into a making 6♠ contract off three key-cards. Before I reveal our somewhat inelegant auction, I'm keen to hear people's views on what South should be doing with this monster at All-Vul and East a pased-hand.

The play was kind of interesting too as I came quite close to playing West for ♣Jxxx due to his stiff ♠ and no ♣ pitch on the run of the trumps, but rightly or wrongly I eventually played for ♣ to be breaking.

[Fluffy]

with something like AQ AQ I'd open 1 spade and rebid 6 clubs, but this hand is too weak for that, opening 4♠ or 4♦ is silly with 3 losers, so I'd just jump shift to clubs. So open 1♠

[FrancesHinden]

I'd just open 1S. It's hard to see how the auction will go without 'cheating' i.e. seeing both hands but I'd start
1S - 2D (game forcing)
3C (extra values, 5-5) - 3NT (horribly unsuitable even though it's a 15-count)
4C (more clubs) -

and now I don't really know without cheating....

I'm interested in your comment on the play, because I think one plausible line is to ruff the opening lead, cash the ace of spades and play more spades if they are 4-0 but otherwise play clubs. This makes 6S if clubs are 3-2, or if the SK is singleton, or if either hand is 1-1 in the blacks, or if either hand has a singleton club and Kx of spades.

The alternative of taking the spade finesse gains with Kx on spades onside with 4 clubs but loses to Kx offside with 1 club (equally likely) as well as losing to singleton king offside, so is worse.

[mrdct]

I opened 4♠, but I contemplated each of:

• pass: Would enable me to show a 2-suiter, but risks the auction being at 5-level at my next turn to bid;
  
• 1♠: Seems a normal action, but feels like it will be too easy for the opps to get in;
  
• 1♣: Has the advantage of being able to pattern out a 7-6 (albeit the wrong way around) to better position partner to evaluate red-suit wastage;
  
• 4♠: This is what I actually chose to open, thinking that some preemption was necessary and I need very little from partner to make it.

Rightly or wrongly, my partner pulled out 4NT as he thought surely some of these goodies will be working cards if South has a couple of Aces. I responded 5♣ (1 or 4) and partner signed-off in 5♠, fortunately completely in tempo as I might have had some LA constraints if 5♠ had been slow. I now started to think about what sort of hands partner would bid 4NT on. In an attempt to run some simulations on the prospects of slam making I started to think that there were plenty of hands with which slam would be cold or at least have some play, so I bid 6♠. I should've pointed out that this was a teams match in a regional Grand National Teams qualifier against a team unlikely to be bidding slams unless entirely obvious, and perhaps this should've dissuaded me.

I got the ♠9 lead and eliminated the possibility of the ♠K being onside so flew ace. I had an option at this point to protect against some 4-1 ♣ break by ruffing a ♣, but that was going to be a disaster if East had ♠Kxx and ♣x so I gave up on that plan and ruffed a low ♥, exited the ♠Q with West pitching a low ♦, ruffed East's ♦ (no diamonds either parter?!) and then ran trumps down to my last one. Nobody pitched any ♣, so now I was faced with the decision about whether to play for the ♣J coming down or play for West to hold ♣Jxxx which seemed plausible with his stiff ♠. Fortuately I got it right and cashed the ♣ from the top.

[inquiry]

The best way to play such hands is to play a method that "covers" them. I might suggest a Misiry auction that starts 3♣ (diamond preempt, or strong two suiter with clubs and an unknown major).

This might cause north a bit of problem... could south really have diamond prempt? If he thinks so, he can bid 3NT, his partner would pass with a diamond preempt. Given both opponents have passed, if he can assume his side doesn't hold 12 diamonds, and he can bid 3♦.

Over 3♦ north would bid 4♣ showing a three loser hand with the black suits.... Since responder can see two cover cards (one in spades, one in clubs), a slam will be reached. There could be concern that opener might spring a leak in his number of losers, since KQxxx in spades for instance would count at "one loser" but could really be two opposite Ax. So a worry wart North will bid 5NT over 4♣ which is pick asking opener to bid six of the black suit in which he holds the jack, and if neither, to bid six in the suit with the most cards.

North COULD explore grand slam over 4♣ is he wanted by first denying a control in diamonds by bidding (4♦, a denial cue-bid). Opener would show a need "only" for the heart ace by bidding 4♥, or he could show no heart honor is useful by bidding 4♠. Responder could then show a "distributional" diamond control (yes, I know he has a real diamond king), by bidding 5♦. Opener would deny that a distributional diamond control is useless by returning to 5♠. Responder could then instruct opener to bid slam in the suit he hold the jack, and lacking a jack, bid slam in his longer black suit by bidding 5NT. Opener would bid 6♠.

Should North try 3NT, opener only passes with a diamond preempt. Over 3NT, with a black two suiter, opener's will rebid 4♣, but now this bid shows 3 or 4 losers due to the loss of space. Also, 4♦ by responder is no longer a denial bid (and only 4♦) because it is how a weak hand with loads of diamonds gets to play in diamonds if partner opens a transfer preempt into the suit responder holds (start with 3NT) then rebid the transferred too suit. So responder would bid 4♥ (denying a heart control). Opener would bid 4♠ saying that the a potential diamond control is useless. I think responder will just bid 5NT (PICK a slam in suit with jack or the longer black suit).

Misiry, and "new misiry" (new is relative, of course) are described on the inquiry2over1 blog. A more complete pdf is attached (or was attached) to a forum post sometime in the past. North's hand falls a little short on the key cards normally needed for misiry bid, but it is so exceptional, one might use this bid if it was available.