[lamford]

---

This was a missed slam by my partner and me last night. 1S was five, and our agreements over double were that pass was encouraging and redouble was first-round control. That may not be best, but I would welcome readers' opinions on how we should have done better. Slam was excellent, and would have made.

[rhm]

North certainly could not have done more in my view. South might have. Giving up over 4♠ was pusillanimous.
But to get there South would have to bid the slam over 4♥ by himself. He could have, but it is tough.
The slam likely depends on whether third round control in diamonds is present.
Nothing in your agreements seem to focus on diamonds.
I strongly prefer slam trial bids after limit raises.

So

1♠ - 3♦
4♦ - 4♠
5♣ - 5♥
6♠

4♦ is a slam trial bid, likely based on a side suit. It says nothing about controls in the other side suits.
When South makes another try North cooperates with 5♥ based on his doubleton diamond.
With three small diamonds he would sign off again in 5♠.

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

What would 3NT instead of 4♣ have been? It is difficult to see how North can be any more suitable after the encouraging pass.

[Cyberyeti]

S has the problem that it looks like N might have ♥K with the lead going through to doubler's AQ, so can't bid this on his own. Was 4♥ a mandatory cue, or does it show some extra suitability ? If it was effectively mandatory, I'd have been inclined to bid 5♠ rather than 4 with a heart holding that is not vulnerable to leading through and nothing else to cue, but the huge 5th trump.

[MrAce]

I agree with Zalendakh.

North thought his pd was looking for ♦ stopper and signed off. However if that was the case South would bid 4♠ and sign off after North already denied a ♦ control, instead he passed and told pd he wasn't sure anymore about North's ♥ holding (Kxx or even KJx may not be sufficient after the DBL). Holding KQ of ♥ North probably could make another move. How to do it can be totally different debate in itself.

You can disregard what i said if Kxx is not good enough to cue in your pdhsip.

[han]

Very tough hand!

My auction could be:

1S - 2NT (7-13 with 4+ spades)
3C (slam try ask) - 4H (10-13 with 4+ strong hearts, no shortness)
4NT - etc

Slam would be bad if partner is specifically 4-4-3-2, but that is much less likely than 4-4-2-3 and partner may also have 5 hearts or spades. If partner is 4-4-3-2 you could still have play, for instance if he has the diamond jack.

[rhm]

Zelandakh, on 2012-September-06, 03:02, said:

What would 3NT instead of 4♣ have been? It is difficult to see how North can be any more suitable after the encouraging pass.

Calling a hand after a limit raise with just one first round and one second round control "suitable" sounds to me like an overbid.
What would you have done with two first round controls? Jump to the grand?
If pass was encouraging, bidding 4♥ in response to 4♣ was as well. Having shown a limit raise I might have bid 4♠ over 4♣.
If pass was encouraging the DBL was certainly not, making it clear that there would be an immediate quick loser.
Apart from the control situation, it is tough to see from North perspective where side suit tricks will be coming from when his LHO doubled for a heart lead.

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

I like cyberyeti's 5♠. We want to show that our heart control is not vulnerable but since we have nothing else to show, asking for keycards is a bit too much.

Maybe rdbl should theoretically show the non-vulnerable heart control while leaving space for partner to ask for keycards, but without that agreement I think 5♠ is practical. If North redoubles, South may take it as first-round control.

[Codo]

The slam is good because of the 5. trump, else the queen had been a real concern, the doubleton diamond and the obviously not existing heart ruff after holding exactly the one and only holding where we are not afraid of a heart lead through dummy and still have no XX avaiable.

All these inforamtions are only known by north, so I would not blame South at all.

Maybe the two shortnesses, the good Heart stop and the 5. trump should encourage North to cooperate after the slam try.Can partner really have less then Kxxxx,xx,AQx,AKx for his slam try? And opposite anything extra- in form of shape or HCPS, Slam must very often have good play.

So, I like the 5 ♠ idea, but at the table, I had used Blackwood- Partner has both minors controlled, but there may be two KCS missing... And I had been not sure whether partner had understood 5 ♠, he surely would here at the BBF, but in the heat of the fight at the table?

[lamford]

Zelandakh, on 2012-September-06, 03:02, said:

What would 3NT instead of 4♣ have been? It is difficult to see how North can be any more suitable after the encouraging pass.

A WET, or wastage enquiry try, asking partner in which suit he would have most wastage opposite a singleton.

[lamford]

MrAce, on 2012-September-06, 03:40, said:

North thought his pd was looking for ♦ stopper and signed off.

No, North (my partner) knew from Pass of the double that South had a diamond control, as North had denied one by bidding 4H. We cue first or second round controls, and North did not want to redouble as that would show the ace. A possible method here is that redouble by South should be a slam try with a doubleton heart, and pass a slam try with a singleton. South is unlikely to have the ace on this auction. But that would have been undiscussed.

[Zelandakh]

rhm, on 2012-September-06, 03:44, said:

Calling a hand after a limit raise with just one first round and one second round control "suitable" sounds to me like an overbid.
What would you have done with two first round controls? Jump to the grand?

It is not a limit raise, it is 10-11. The above is a poor description of this hand. it is a maximum with an extra trump, no wastage and excellent honour concentration. Think about it for a moment, if we had the trump queen this would be wastage in the 10 card fit; a minor suit queen might be wastage, might not. But the heart queen to back up the king is golden. Show me any hand that qualifies as 10-11 that is better. There may be one around but if it is it will certainly not be a lot better. Describing this hand as anything other than "suitable" seems to me to be incredibly pessimistic

rhm, on 2012-September-06, 03:44, said:

What would you have done with two first round controls? Jump to the grand?

With 2 first round controls it seems obvious to start with a redouble to show first round heart control. But you knew that already.

rhm, on 2012-September-06, 03:44, said:

If pass was encouraging, bidding 4♥ in response to 4♣ was as well. Having shown a limit raise I might have bid 4♠ over 4♣.

This comes back to my question regarding a 3NT bid. If 4♣ is serious then 4♥ is surely mandatory.

rhm, on 2012-September-06, 03:44, said:

If pass was encouraging the DBL was certainly not, making it clear that there would be an immediate quick loser.

No, it makes it clear that our ♥Q is a fantastic card. North knows about this, South does not.

rhm, on 2012-September-06, 03:44, said:

Apart from the control situation, it is tough to see from North perspective where side suit tricks will be coming from when his LHO doubled for a heart lead.

Partner has shown a big hand. Perhaps if we cooperate and let them know what we have they will be able to figure out for themselves whether we have enough tricks. Once we make a forward-going move other than redouble (presumably 5♠, what else?), we have practically painted a picture of our hand to partner. Unlike Roland, I am not worried about this being misunderstood. If I cannot redouble, nor cue a minor, nor show heart shortage, and am nonetheless still looking at slam... well seriously, what else is there left other than what we hold?

[kenrexford]

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.

[han]

I agree with Ken that that may be the optimal agreement, but I do not have that agreement and would not have invented it at the table. Perhaps north should have guessed to bid 5S and then south should have guessed to bid 6. This is what you are doing on this auction, it's complete guessing since neither partner shows anything about their shape.

On many hands you can get to the right contract by making slam investigations purely based on strength, fit and honor locations. This is not one of those hands, this is the kind of hand where only a pair with good agreements will have a much better chance.

[lamford]

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

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

Isn't it theoretically better to play Redouble as "reverse last train", i.e signoff or moving on over 4♠, and 4♠ as last train? Similar to other situations where one interchanges the game bid and the last train bid.

[han]

Given your methods on this hand I wouldn't worry about inverting last train.

Not that I don't like the idea, but it seems really disaster prone. Not only could either partner forget the convention, but there might also be tricky situations where 4S is just a sign off or a suggestion to play in spades. You would need very good agreements about when 4S is inverted last train, while the last train more or less runs by itself.

[kenrexford]

lamford, on 2012-September-06, 09:22, said:

Isn't it theoretically better to play Redouble as "reverse last train", i.e signoff or moving on over 4♠, and 4♠ as last train? Similar to other situations where one interchanges the game bid and the last train bid.

Actually, that was my initial thought, as well. But, I wanted to start with Baby Steps. Once you agree that one of the two is LTTC with and the other without, you have arrived enough to realize that reversing these has serious merit.

[TimG]

lamford, on 2012-September-06, 02:36, said:

This was a missed slam by my partner and I last night.

Have you been reading this?

[mike777]

tough hand.

for starters north has an adjusted 6 loser hand so showing a 10-11 pt. hand is not best.
It sounds like south is playing north for an 8-9 loser hand.

You cannot have your 3d bid include anywhere from 6-9 loser type hands.

somehow north needs to show a gf in spades

[rhm]

mike777, on 2012-September-06, 12:14, said:

tough hand.

for starters north has an adjusted 6 loser hand so showing a 10-11 pt. hand is not best.
It sounds like south is playing north for an 8-9 loser hand.

You cannot have your 3d bid include anywhere from 6-9 loser type hands.

somehow north needs to show a gf in spades

Doubletons are overrated by standard loser count. It is the same problem when queens are valued like aces in standard loser count.
Adjusting the North hand to 6 losers is way too low.

Rainer Herrmann