[gnasher]

rhm, on 2012-September-06, 03:01, said:

The slam likely depends on whether third round control in diamonds is present.
Nothing in your agreements seem to focus on diamonds.

Nor do any of the other posts in this thread (except Han's), which is a bit strange because North's diamond holding is critical.

Quote

I strongly prefer slam trial bids after limit raises.

Me too. This hand is a good example of why it's right.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

kenrexford, on 2012-September-06, 06:33, said:

IMO, redouble by South should show Ace or Queen in this auction, pass diamond control without heart help.

IMO, redouble by North should be Last Train with heart not a problem (Ace or K-Q).

Agreement (needed) otherwise is a problem.

IMO.... this is brilliant..... and could be used even if North were Declarer.

[JLOGIC]

I would have just driven with the north hand over a slam try. How much better can your hand really be for a limit raise? You have the 5th trump, both doubletons, etc. If you want to cue to avoid slam opposite 2 small diamonds, fine, but when partner passes over 4H X you must do more.

[JLOGIC]

On second thought, having bid 4H and hearing X p p, I think 5S is probably the best bid. Show a great hand without the HA (or any other cuebid), and let partner work it out. He should get your hand pretty close to what it is. The north hand is not that great if partner has a stiff heart, and partner may be passing to see whether your cuebid was the ace or not, so it would be an error to take control.

The north hand is very good though, signing off in 4S is quite bad imo.

[sathyab]

kenrexford, on 2012-September-06, 06:33, said:

IMO, redouble by South should show Ace or Queen in this auction, pass diamond control without heart help.

IMO, redouble by North should be Last Train with heart not a problem (Ace or K-Q).

Agreement otherwise is a problem.

I think pass by South should show more than a simple ♦ control in view of partner denying any control in the suit. If the opener is looking at say ♠KJxxxx ♥xx ♦Axx ♣AK, he should not make an encouraging pass, as he should most likely expect two losers in the red suits. It's of course possible to construct a perfecto such as ♠Axxx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣Qxxx and miss a slam.

[twoshy]

I like the idea of bidding 5♠ after partner passes 4♥X. At the table I probably would have bid 5♥ with the partnership understanding being that XX by either partner = 1st round control. Obviously this is not an optimal agreement, but I'd be hopeful of partner understanding 5♥ given this agreement.

[gszes]

after s passes the x of 4h and given the bidding N did not trust south.
There is no reason for south to assume N has KQ of hearts vs say
KJ with the lead going through n at trick 1. S is still interested in slam
and the N hand is essentially a super max. hearts solidly stopped a 5th
spade when promising 4 (egad extra values) and no wasted
spade honors like the Q or J in a ten card + fit. Once p passes
the double of 4h and encourages there is just little reason for
North to not just bid 6s. It is difficult to imagine your hand being
any better. Even w/o detailed bidding it is possible to get to many
good slams and this is one of them if partners trust one another.

[Zelandakh]

twoshy, on 2012-September-06, 19:51, said:

I like the idea of bidding 5♠ after partner passes 4♥X. At the table I probably would have bid 5♥ with the partnership understanding being that XX by either partner = 1st round control. Obviously this is not an optimal agreement, but I'd be hopeful of partner understanding 5♥ given this agreement.

I think 5♥ should show shortage here. This is one of the reasons why I think 5♠ paints such a clear picture of the given hand.

[rmnka447]

Since the bidders are bidding 1st or 2nd round controls, South's failure to initially cue bid 3 ♥ over 3 ♦ marks the hand with at least a doubleton ♥.

North should also realize that after the encouraging pass of 4 ♥ doubled that South must have 1st round controls in both minors, otherwise a signoff in 4 ♠ would be appropriate.

It should also be apparent that South must hold ♠ K because South could not make any slam try without it.

So South is known to have at least something like the following 9 cards --

♠ Kxxxx
♥ xx
♦ A
♣ A

For South to make a sane slam try, the missing cards must fill in some strong holding in one of the minors. North's minor doubletons are both working and useful opposite whatever minor South must hold. Also, holding the ♠ Axxxx, North knows there are no likely spade losers -- something that South may never be able to visualize.

So, North has to make some forward move over the pass rather signoff. Lacking any other agreement other than that Redbl would show the ♥ A, I think the practical bid by North should be 6 ♠. Something like 5 ♥ might show the ♥ KQ, but will South ever be able to infer that North must have the ♠ A to make that bid? It would seem pretty hard to do so. Exactly the same issue/problem exists with a 5 ♠ bid by North.

[MrAce]

rmnka447, on 2012-September-07, 04:17, said:

Since the bidders are bidding 1st or 2nd round controls, South's failure to initially cue bid 3 ♥ over 3 ♦ marks the hand with at least a doubleton ♥.

North should also realize that after the encouraging pass of 4 ♥ doubled that South must have 1st round controls in both minors, otherwise a signoff in 4 ♠ would be appropriate.

It should also be apparent that South must hold ♠ K because South could not make any slam try without it.

So South is known to have at least something like the following 9 cards --

♠ Kxxxx
♥ xx
♦ A
♣ A

For South to make a sane slam try, the missing cards must fill in some strong holding in one of the minors. North's minor doubletons are both working and useful opposite whatever minor South must hold. Also, holding the ♠ Axxxx, North knows there are no likely spade losers -- something that South may never be able to visualize.

So, North has to make some forward move over the pass rather signoff. Lacking any other agreement other than that Redbl would show the ♥ A, I think the practical bid by North should be 6 ♠. Something like 5 ♥ might show the ♥ KQ, but will South ever be able to infer that North must have the ♠ A to make that bid? It would seem pretty hard to do so. Exactly the same issue/problem exists with a 5 ♠ bid by North.

Nice post, i am not sure about the final part though. Upto your definition South also can hold a hand like KQJxx xx AQx AQx where slam is not hopeless but pretty bad. South can also hold KJxxxx xxx AKQ A. Etc etc...I think you are biased by knowing that South has 5-5 hand which in fact North doesn't know and i think Rainer and Andy has valid points about making slam bids differently with bicolor hands by opener and differently with single suited or balanced or semi balanced power house hands. I don't know how they can manage it in different hands but at least thats what i thought they said, i may have gotten it wrong.

[Fluffy]

MrAce, on 2012-September-08, 04:27, said:

Nice post, i am not sure about the final part though. Upto your definition South also can hold a hand like KQJxx xx AQx AQx where slam is not hopeless but pretty bad.

I have a good way to evaluate balanced vs balanced hands in slam context: I use my fingers to count to 28 combined (29 at most) and sing off in 4♠.

I agree that slam exploration can be improved a lot, specially after a sequence such as this where both 3♥ and 3NT can be used as some form of relays.

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-September-08, 04:27, said:

i think Rainer and Andy has valid points about making slam bids differently with bicolor hands by opener and differently with single suited or balanced or semi balanced power house hands. I don't know how they can manage it in different hands but at least thats what i thought they said, i may have gotten it wrong.

3NT initiates cue-bidding, and new suits are natural slam tries. In this sequence you might choose to swap 3♥ and 3NT, so 3NT shows hearts and 3♥ is a general slam try.

[rhm]

MrAce, on 2012-September-08, 04:27, said:

... and i think Rainer and Andy has valid points about making slam bids differently with bicolor hands by opener and differently with single suited or balanced or semi balanced power house hands. I don't know how they can manage it in different hands but at least thats what i thought they said, i may have gotten it wrong.

It is a question of hand frequencies and priorities.
Many good players believe the key to successful slam bidding is to understand and use control bidding, at least when asking for keycards will not give you the right answer.

Roy Hughes in his book "Building a Bidding System" has a small chapter of 13 pages on slam bidding.
It is worth reading and then reading again, not because it has earth-shattering revolutionary new concepts but because it concisely describes what good slam bidding is about.
For slam to be present you need tricks, good trumps, aces and controls in that priority.
Hughes writes: "A simple answer would be that bidding system should assign the priorities the same way.
First we should see that there are lots of tricks, then we should check on trumps, then on the number of first-round controls, and lastly whether all suits are controlled."

I am not biased against control bidding provided the others, but particularly the first priority - tricks - are dealt with reasonably.

I cite 2 examples from this book, the first slightly changed by me to be more analogous to the bidding here:

---

Tell me how you will find the slam by way of control bidding and yes we have bid the slam on 28 HCP.

Another example to think about from the book:

---

4♦: superaccept with diamonds
5♦: Help in diamonds
5♥: First round control in case of interest in grand slam
5♠: Nothing more to say

Rainer Herrmann