[Cyberyeti]

---

We exchanged a lot of info, but hadn't actually agreed clubs yet, so I couldn't see a sensible way of asking for the same hand -K♥,J♣ +Q♣ over 4♣, so I just blasted 6♣. This surprisingly resulted in being the only one out of the 4 A team pairs to bid a slam. Partner guessed the clubs and made all 13.

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-February-26, 16:05, said:

---

We exchanged a lot of info, but hadn't actually agreed clubs yet, so I couldn't see a sensible way of asking for the same hand -K♥,J♣ +Q♣ over 4♣, so I just blasted 6♣. This surprisingly resulted in being the only one out of the 4 A team pairs to bid a slam. Partner guessed the clubs and made all 13.

congrats I think I would end up in 3nt. minor suit slams are tough to bid.

[FrancesHinden]

Playing your methods, I don't understand why West doesn't bid 4C over 3D. Why bother going through 4th suit when you can agree clubs in a slam-interested fashion?

It's actually easier not playing a load of system.

after you start with assorted natural bids

1C - 1S
2C - 2H
2S - 3C

responder has shown spades, hearts and clubs in a game forcing fashion. Opener is close to a slam drive now.

[kayin801]

FrancesHinden, on 2012-February-26, 16:43, said:

Playing your methods, I don't understand why West doesn't bid 4C over 3D. Why bother going through 4th suit when you can agree clubs in a slam-interested fashion?

It's actually easier not playing a load of system.

after you start with assorted natural bids

1C - 1S
2C - 2H
2S - 3C

responder has shown spades, hearts and clubs in a game forcing fashion. Opener is close to a slam drive now.

This is exactly what I'd do. I'm guessing 2♥ is probably non-forcing or artificial in their methods, otherwise I can't think of any reason not to bid it.

As they bid it, maybe 4♣ instead of 3♥ would be an offer to play since they couldn't go to 3NT. After 3♥ I think N should bid 3♠, having withheld support for so long, and now S can bid 4♣ forcing.

[mike777]

This still does not sound easy....we are missing 2 keycards and dont know west is void justyet.

Also as noted we dont know if 2h is gf here.

In any event tough one.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

FrancesHinden, on 2012-February-26, 16:43, said:

Playing your methods, I don't understand why West doesn't bid 4C over 3D. Why bother going through 4th suit when you can agree clubs in a slam-interested fashion?

It's actually easier not playing a load of system.

after you start with assorted natural bids

1C - 1S
2C - 2H
2S - 3C

responder has shown spades, hearts and clubs in a game forcing fashion. Opener is close to a slam drive now.

Since the OP plays "Cheapest bid new suit" (such as the Bourke Relay ), which is 2D! here and may be artificial, then 2H instead is NON-forcing :
1C - 1S
2C - ??
....... 2H = weak, 5/4+, non-forcing
....... 3H-jump = 5/5 invitational
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In OP's auction, 3H = 5/4+, established a GF after going thru 2D!

[Flem72]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-February-26, 17:49, said:

Since the OP plays "Cheapest bid new suit" (such as the Bourke Relay ), which is 2D! here and may be artificial, then 2H instead is NON-forcing :
1C - 1S
2C - ??
....... 2H = weak, 5/4+, non-forcing
....... 3H-jump = 5/5 invitational
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In OP's auction, 3H = 5/4+, established a GF after going thru 2D!

Agree, and Bourkeish is how I'd like to start also (O would call 2S at third bid to show secondary Hx or xxx support), but after R's 3Ht it becomes a questino of judgment: clarify the major two-suiter with 4H (there may be a H slam) or give in to the C before the 5 level.

1C-1S
2C-2D!
2S-3H
3N-?

If 4H, shape is clalrified and I'd hope partner would prefer to 4S on the actual deal, but we are now poorly placed for other O holdings: O could hold 2-3-2-6 and pass.

If 4C, bazinga.

So no matter how you get to the 3-level (natch is swell, but is 1C-1S/2C-2H forcing on "change of suit by R" grounds?), I think success requires R to eschew pattern out bidding and support the C

[Cyberyeti]

As others have mentioned, 2♥ would be NF for us.

I felt partner could have bid 3♠(showing Hx, he'd have already shown 3 card support) over 3♥ (I was angling for a 3N bid indicating Kx or 3♠ when I bid 3♥), I could then bid 4♣, and over his 4♦ ace ask I'd have shown 2 without Q and a diamond void, meaning he could have evaluated Ax, x, Kxxx, AQxxxx correctly and bid 7 given how big a hand I'd shown.

[mike777]

I suppose this gets the job done but feels a bit double dummy for me:

1c?=1s
2c=3h
3nt=4c?
4d(rkc for c)=5nt 2 with void somewhere
6c

Not even sure I would open this hand 1c

[aguahombre]

FrancesHinden, on 2012-February-26, 16:43, said:

It's actually easier not playing a load of system.

after you start with assorted natural bids

1C - 1S
2C - 2H
2S - 3C

responder has shown spades, hearts and clubs in a game forcing fashion. Opener is close to a slam drive now.

I tried to imagine this approach, since we like natural. But unless 2H is game force, and not just approach forcing, I don't think opener can afford to bid just 2S with her extras --or 2NT, either. So, we ended up not showing that clubs are trump until the 4-level anyway and got stuck in the same bind.

[rhm]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-February-26, 18:22, said:

As others have mentioned, 2♥ would be NF for us.

I felt partner could have bid 3♠(showing Hx, he'd have already shown 3 card support) over 3♥ (I was angling for a 3N bid indicating Kx or 3♠ when I bid 3♥), I could then bid 4♣, and over his 4♦ ace ask I'd have shown 2 without Q and a diamond void, meaning he could have evaluated Ax, x, Kxxx, AQxxxx correctly and bid 7 given how big a hand I'd shown.

I agree.
I do not understand what 4♣ was supposed to accomplish. 4♣ should show longer or better clubs.
I guess 3♦ denied 3 cards in spades unless maybe 3♠=0♥=4♦=6♣
3♠ is clearly marked.

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

rhm, on 2012-February-27, 05:09, said:

I agree.
I do not understand what 4♣ was supposed to accomplish. 4♣ should show longer or better clubs.
I guess 3♦ denied 3 cards in spades unless maybe 3♠=0♥=4♦=6♣
3♠ is clearly marked.

Rainer Herrmann

4♣ is a sort of none of the above bid, no heart stop, no spade support, no 5th diamond.

3046 would choose between 3♦ and 3♠ if max, but would certainly bid 4♠ over 3♥.

[gnasher]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-February-27, 06:41, said:

4♣ is a sort of none of the above bid, no heart stop, no spade support, no 5th diamond.

3046 would choose between 3♦ and 3♠ if max, but would certainly bid 4♠ over 3♥.

So in your system 3♠ over 3♥ doesn't exist?

[Cyberyeti]

gnasher, on 2012-February-27, 07:57, said:

So in your system 3♠ over 3♥ doesn't exist?

No as stated above in post 8, it must be Hx and I think partner should have bid it.

[gnasher]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-February-27, 07:59, said:

No as stated above in post 8, it must be Hx and I think partner should have bid it.

Sorry, didn't see that. So 4♣ in your methods is typically 1246 or 2146 with nothing in the majors? In that case, I think that you shouldn't concern yourself with the possibility that you can make a grand slam.

In fact, 6♣ appears to be in jeopardy: it needs there to be no trump loser, and also either a non-heart lead or partner to have a singleton heart.

[Cyberyeti]

gnasher, on 2012-February-27, 08:08, said:

Sorry, didn't see that. So 4♣ in your methods is typically 1246 or 2146 with nothing in the majors? In that case, I think that you shouldn't concern yourself with the possibility that you can make a grand slam.

In fact, 6♣ appears to be in jeopardy: it needs there to be no trump loser, and also either a non-heart lead or partner to have a singleton heart.

Stiff ace of spades is perfectly possible.

A, xx, Axxx, AQxxxx would seem to be OK for 7 (although might be work on a heart lead it's no worse than spades 4-3 if trumps 3-1, cold if trumps 2-2), as does A, x, Qxxx, AQJxxxx.

[Zelandakh]

I think this hand is a good advert for the 1♣ response structure I suggested in the Transfer Walsh thread. After

1♣ - 1♦ (♥)
1♥ (0-2♥s) - 1♠
2♣ - 2♠
2NT - 3♣

Responder has shown a GF hand with 5413 or 5503 distribution and it seems that Opener should be able to make a slam try. Perhaps

4♣ - 5♦ (accept, 2 + void)
5♥ - 6♣ (no ♣Q)

to finish.


In my own system (which uses the same response structure as above) this is much harder as I have to start a level higher:

2♣ = 10-14, 6+ clubs or 5♣4M
... - 2♦ = 4+ hearts
2♥ = 0-2 hearts
... - 2♠ = 4+ spades, F1
3♣ = max, 0-3 spades (hence 6+ clubs)
... - 3♠ = 5+ spades
3NT

The bidding may very well die here although if West should choose to show the club support then slam will obviously be reached. It is obviously difficult to be objective about the decision seeing both hands but my feeling is that it is probably right to show the clubs at IMPS but stay in 3NT at MPs. Anyway, the end would be:

... - 4♣ = slam try agreeing clubs
4NT = accept slam try, 2 key cards without ♣Q
... - 6♣