[gnasher]

Phil, on 2011-May-27, 09:48, said:

Implies is stronger than "alludes to", "infers", much less "hints at" I think, so this seems like an argument about semantics rather than bidding.

The difference between "implies", "alludes to" and "infers" isn't one of strength: the three words have different meanings. In this sequence, responder implies three spades, opener infers that responder has three spades, and either player may allude to this in the postmortem.

[xxhong]

1S 2C
2H 2S
4C(cue bid, showing extra, 15+HCP, 5-4-2-2 shape, 2 or 4 KC)4D(cue)
4H(cue) 5C(cue, slam zone, denies SQ)
5N(choice of slams, we have no cuebids available, we may miss one KC and SQ, but DQ, SJ and HQJ should justifies this bid, if partner thinks that we are in the slam zone) 6N

This hand is no easy.

dboxley, on 2011-May-21, 02:26, said:

---

North deals. Please give your auction with comments. No opposition bidding. Ours started:
1♠
2♣ 2♥
2♠

Also please say if the 2♠ bid
1) promises 3+ spades
2) implies 3+ spades
3) neither.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2011-May-27, 09:48, said:

By the way, I prefer a style where 2♠ shows 3, and 3♠ shows four card support. What are the others playing 3♠ as?

I play like this too Phil, but now that i see u do too, it must be wrong and i will change it asap

Free, on 2011-May-23, 06:52, said:

I haven't calculated in depth, but is 6NT really that much better?

Yes, 6 NT is better. Basically in 6 ♣ or ♠, your chances are reduced to scoring all your trumps after♥A is cashed. However in 6NT u have the same chances + cashing AK in other suit first.

I wonder though, which line would be the best in 6 NT ? Which AK to cash first ? I would think to cash AK ♠ and if not drops go for ♣ finesse which has 1 way to play it and u dont torture yourself for misguessing ♠ However i am sure we will be tortured in ♣ suit as well when/if RHO drops Q or T in first round (Q from QT, or T from Tx)

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2011-May-27, 14:43, said:

I wonder though, which line would be the best in 6 NT ? Which AK to cash first ? I would think to cash AK ♠ and if not drops go for ♣ finesse which has 1 way to play it and u dont torture yourself for misguessing ♠ However i am sure we will be tortured in ♣ suit as well when/if RHO drops Q or T in first round (Q from QT, or T from Tx)

In 6NT, it looks right to cash the top diamonds, top clubs, and top hearts, then guess the spades using whatever information we have gleaned. However, we may not get the chance to do that.

Suppose that we get a diamond lead. One of our routes to twelve tricks is 5 spades + 3 diamonds + 2 clubs + 2 hearts. When we knock out ♥A, we don't want them to have a black-suit winner, so we should play a heart first. That will probably hold, so we'll play another one, throwing a club. Now they could play a third heart, forcing us to pitch a spade (we can't afford another club).

That would make it impossible to play South for ♠Q after cashing the top clubs, so we'd be back to a guess as to which black suit to cash the top cards in.

There's some scope for mind-games here, but not many defenders would see deeply enough for that.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2011-May-27, 16:41

[han]

gnasher, on 2011-May-27, 10:03, said:

The difference between "implies", "alludes to" and "infers" isn't one of strength: the three words have different meanings. In this sequence, responder implies three spades, opener infers that responder has three spades, and either player may allude to this in the postmortem.

Yay!

[dboxley]

I don't remember who started the argument about 'promises' and 'implies' but I'm sure I could find someone from New Jersey who would take care of the problem for a reasonable fee. The reason why it is important is because it affects opener's rebid. My partner rebid 3C because of the lack of a diamond stop and we got to 6C. I could see pitching my spade loser on a heart if we had solid clubs. If we had an agreement that 2S promised support then 2NT is ok.

[han]

I started the argument about promises and implies. Clearly you and I have a different idea of what the word means, so I would certainly avoid it in my system write-up.

I think east should rebid 2NT whether it promises, suggests or denies 3 spades. It is important to show your shape, and it can hardly be wrong to bid notrump first when you hold Qx.

[tolvyrj]

Promises, implies, neither...why guess, if 2/1 is absolute game force, we dont have to hang our selves this round; we can do it later if we please to do so, bid 3 ♦ and let prd tell the whole story

[dboxley]

han, on 2011-May-29, 07:59, said:

I started the argument about promises and implies. Clearly you and I have a different idea of what the word means, so I would certainly avoid it in my system write-up.

I think east should rebid 2NT whether it promises, suggests or denies 3 spades. It is important to show your shape, and it can hardly be wrong to bid notrump first when you hold Qx.

But if partner is bidding 2S with a doubleton then he doesn't have a diamond stopper. That is the whole point of this discussion which you don't seem to grasp.

[han]

At the risk of looking even more ignorant, let me once more try to say what I was saying. For greater clarity I'll try not to try to be funny.

Implies is a fuzzy term. As far as I know, people also use it to mean "by inference". For instance, if I always make a negative double with 3 cards in your major and I pass, then it implies that I have fewer than 3 cards in your major. It seems that in the way you use it here, 2S shows either 3-card support or only 2-card in a fairly balanced hand that doesn't have a diamond stopper. But, wouldn't it be much clearer to describe it as just that?

Your auction up to 3C is also fuzzy. If 2S can perhaps be a doubleton, and 3C can be a doubleton as well, then how will anyone ever know what's going on? With the given hand, I'd rather bid 2NT. If you want to play that 2S doesn't promise a spade fit, then I suggest that 2NT doesn't promise a stopper, but does show something in diamonds, for example Qx. Then, partner can bid 3NT holding Jxx in diamonds, or make a descriptive bid with a small doubleton.

And if partner has made an inspired 2S bid holding KJ xxx Axx KQxxx? Better!

[MrAce]

Can i ask a stupid question ?

If responder has no 3 card support and no stopper in ♦, why is he not using 4th suit ? Is 4th suit forbidden fruit after 2/1 gf auctions ? Does it show 6-5 or something ?

1♠--2♣
2♥----3♦ ?

[Zelandakh]

My auction (not 2/1)...

1S = 10-17, 5+ spades
... - 1N = INV+ relay
2D = 4+ hearts
... - 2H = GF relay
2N = 5-4 majors
... - 3C = relay
3H = 5422
... - 3S = relay
4D = max, 4 controls
... - 4N = Q ask
5C = no CQ
... - 5S = SQ?
P = nope

I do not think I would stop in 4S or find the 6NT contract. I think Ben's auction and methods looks the best for this hand.