[pescetom]

A hand dealt manually yesterday.
MPs, nobody vulnerable, dealer is North and leads 1♦.
How would your partnership bid on in absence of competition?

---

[Cyberyeti]

1♦-1♥
2♣-4♥

Maybe I miss a slam if partner has ♣A5432 but you can't always get complete science,

[nige1]

South has 8+ playing tricks, so is probably worth 2♠ (4th suit).
South's sequence shows good ♥s.
North has good controls and might cue 4♠ but should probably pass.

---

[thawp66]

North has 14 cards. I wonder if that can result in an extra overtrick or undertrick?

[Tramticket]

thawp66, on 2018-September-15, 23:14, said:

North has 14 cards. I wonder if that can result in an extra overtrick or undertrick?

Yes, a call for the director needed.

I would be more excited if you remove a spade, but we are still playing 4H, probably on Cyberyeti's auction.

[pescetom]

Diagram corrected now, thanks.

[The_Badger]

Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-15, 17:11, said:

1♦-1♥
2♣-4♥

Maybe I miss a slam if partner has ♣A5432 but you can't always get complete science,

Agree. With the North hand now corrected to 3064, I'd just see the auction going 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♦ - 4♥. When both hands see their partner bidding their voids, their are no frills here.

[nekthen]

You all too clever for me
Only one more bid in my auction 4♥

[maartenxq]

pescetom, on 2018-September-15, 15:38, said:

How would your partnership bid on in absence of competition?

1 ♦- 4 ♥
because of void in opening suit. This can miss a slam however.

1 ♦- 2 ♥
3 ♣ - 4 ♥

therefore I would bid 2 ♥ forcing and then 4 to show a hand like this. If partner can continue now slam must be good. Partner will now pass.


Maarten Baltussen

[pescetom]

Here's the full hand.

---

Not particularly proud of our bidding. We're a fairly ethical pair, but there probably was some UI flying around with such attractive hands in misfit. Once partner bid 3♥ showing mild slam interest I couldn't resist and asked keycards (too late to fix suit and control-bid effectively), so we stopped on the edge of the precipice. With hindsight, 1♦ 4♥ pass would not be a mistake.

[PhilG007]

pescetom, on 2018-September-16, 06:25, said:

Here's the full hand.

---

Not particularly proud of our bidding. We're a fairly ethical pair, but there probably was some UI flying around with such attractive hands in misfit. Once partner bid 3♥ showing mild slam interest I couldn't resist and asked keycards (too late to fix suit and control-bid effectively), so we stopped on the edge of the precipice. With hindsight, 1♦ 4♥ pass would not be a mistake.

What was the purpose of South's 2♠ bid? Was it intended as 4th suit forcing with a view to playing in NTs? If so,it was a ridiculous bid.
in the face of a total misfit. Hands that don't fit in a suit very often don't fit in No Trumps either(!) After the 2♣ bid South should simply jump to 4♥
direct sending the message "I insist we play the hand in MY suit partner. Please pass"

[nullve]

PhilG007, on 2018-September-16, 07:29, said:

After the 2♣ bid South should simply jump to 4♥ direct sending the message "I insist we play the hand in MY suit partner. Please pass"

North should also pass with

♠A
♥Kxx
♦AJxxx
♣Axxx

?

[msjennifer]

DELETED

[msjennifer]

DELETED.SLOW NETWORK.

[msjennifer]

.SLOW NETWORK .SORRY.DELETED

[msjennifer]

pescetom, on 2018-September-15, 15:38, said:

A hand dealt manually yesterday.
MPs, nobody vulnerable, dealer is North and leads 1♦.
How would your partnership bid on in absence of competition?

---

Sir,we shall bid 1D-4H showing an 8 carder suit headed by the Ace and two of the four top honors.Since opener has only three QUICK tricks he will PASS.YES and someday we might lose when partner produces Axxx-K-QJxxx-AQx

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2018-September-16, 06:25, said:

Not particularly proud of our bidding. We're a fairly ethical pair, but there probably was some UI flying around with such attractive hands in misfit. Once partner bid 3♥ showing mild slam interest I couldn't resist and asked keycards (too late to fix suit and control-bid effectively), so we stopped on the edge of the precipice. With hindsight, 1♦ 4♥ pass would not be a mistake.

It would for us, 1♦-4♥ asks for keycards, so we would have to take it slower.

Since we play 1♦-1♥-2m-3♥ as forcing and 4♥ as to play, I'm not totally clear which is the right bid here, but I lean towards 4♥

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-16, 12:59, said:

It would for us, 1♦-4♥ asks for keycards, so we would have to take it slower.

The price for that is the inability to close down a hand like this, maybe without ♣K... but I'm sure it has advantages too, the important thing about agreements is to agree.

Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-16, 12:59, said:

Since we play 1♦-1♥-2m-3♥ as forcing and 4♥ as to play, I'm not totally clear which is the right bid here, but I lean towards 4♥

Fair enough. For us 1♦-1♥-2m-3♥ is non-forcing and 4♥ is to play, a premise to my comment about 4SF below.

PhilG007, on 2018-September-16, 07:29, said:

What was the purpose of South's 2♠ bid? Was it intended as 4th suit forcing with a view to playing in NTs? If so,it was a ridiculous bid.
in the face of a total misfit. Hands that don't fit in a suit very often don't fit in No Trumps either(!) After the 2♣ bid South should simply jump to 4♥ direct sending the message "I insist we play the hand in MY suit partner. Please pass"

As previously said, I have some sympathy with a direct jump to 4♥; given the void in opener's suit it is quite probably all we are worth. Nor am I thrilled with the 2♠ bid, which risks conveying excessive enthusiasm to partner and obliging us to reveal unnecessary information to opponents. Having said that, I think it is technically sound and far from ridiculous. The purpose is obviously not to look for an unlikely 3NT contract but to install a game force and investigate opener's hand. If North happens to be able to raise to 3♥ South can control-bid to slam, if North signs off in 4♥ South is out of his agony, if North rebids 3♦ or bids 3NT then South can cheerfully sign off in 4♥. The error is that South did not sign off after 3♦ but instead bid 3♥ showing some persisting slam interest, and that North then took the risk of asking Keycards. Luckily it didn't do any damage this time.

[bluechip10]

pescetom, on 2018-September-15, 15:38, said:

A hand dealt manually yesterday.
MPs, nobody vulnerable, dealer is North and leads 1♦.
How would your partnership bid on in absence of competition?

---

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

Recognizing that NT is probably a failure and looking at the losers. I'm satisfied with 4hts as a final contract. If we make six--then the 2 dia bidder underbid.

[pescetom]

bluechip10, on 2018-September-17, 11:34, said:

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

Recognizing that NT is probably a failure and looking at the losers. I'm satisfied with 4hts as a final contract. If we make six--then the 2 dia bidder underbid.

Maybe your 2♦ bidder underbid anyway... but yes NT is almost certainly a failure and South would do well to be satisfied with 4♥.