[Cyberyeti]

We played a multiple teams event yesterday, there were 3 slam boards our way, 2 of them I just successfully punted the slam, one we didn't even sniff. Looking for better methods or just better bids to have a bit more confidence in what we were doing.

Our system is somewhat bent weak NT Acol with all suit openers showing 4.

---

2N was good 19-21 and I couldn't see any reason to go beyond 4♥ with my bald 11 with lots of black suit losers, slam is cold if trumps are 3-2.

---

This hand was interesting, I decided we needed a swing so punted a 6♠ that I felt could be cold but was unlikely to be without play, and that I felt I had no more sensible way of proceeding towards. We had agreed that 3♠ was forcing, but not whether it was better than 4♠, or merely a suggestion to play spades with something like AQ, xxx, xxx, AQJxx as you would wish to opposite KJxxx, xxx, A, Kxxx but not xxxxx, AKQ, x, Kxxx. We open the minor with 4M4m so 3♣ showed a 5th spade. All I knew was that partner almost certainly had exactly 3 spades from the lack of other bids, and around the strength he actually held. As the play actually went, I didn't need to find anything, A♥ led, K ruffed out from the other hand establishing Q, clubs 5-0 and the hand ruffed in when I led small towards dummy.

---

I couldn't see anything sensible to do over 4♥, we don't play 5N as PAS, 2♣ is 9+ with 5 or 10-12 with a 3334, 4♥ is good raise to 5♣ with a heart control, spades could have been wide open, but if they were, I felt I might just get a heart lead and dispose of them opposite say xx, AK, KQxxx, QJxx.

Any suggestions for improvements ?

[Fluffy]

First one you are screwed, even if your system allowed partner to open 1♦ I don't think I would move with your hand. Even with strong club I wouldn't be able to find the ♦J so slam would be against the odds.


Second one is a finesse slam, you just shouldn't bother to find it or not.

On the third one it is simply impossible that partner has spades wide open. 4♥ must be shortness, since 3NT is there for other hands, and 4♣ as well, although on ACOL perhaps its not forcing, on other systems it is GF after a 2/1.

[Zelandakh]

On Hand 1, West could bid 4♣ over 3♥. That would probably be enough to get you there in comfort.

The auction in Hand 2 is a classic Acol problem. If you play a 2/1 response as forcing to 2NT or as promising a rebid then the direct 3♣ raise can show extras. If East tries that then West can afford to take it more slowly. It sounds very much as though the slam goes down on best defence as the cards actually were. Obviously the thing to take away from this hand is a discussion on whether 4♠ is any dead minimum or a picture bid.

I think I would have bid 5♦ over 4♥ with your hand on #3. 4♥ seems like a pretty serious call to me, since 4♣ must surely be a slam try when the option to double is there on a weaker hand with clubs. Change the ♥A to the ♦K and it looks better. Assuming 4♣ is standard rather than something like a conditional ask, the bidding can continue with an exchange of cue bids reaching 6 with more security. If 4♣ were a conditional ask, West would find out about the extras and 3 key cards and can even check for ♦K if they want before settling for the small slam.

[kenrexford]

#1: Echo Zelandakh. People seem to think that 20-21 is a tight range. Once a suit contract fit is found, however, there is a wild difference between quacky 20 and primed 21, especially with shape. This hand for Opener has 8 controls, which by LTC adjusts up to 22 HCP. Add in the doubleton, and you get to a functional 23-count. A cue should show an upgraded hand like this. Notice how important that is for Responder in the tweener hands.

#2. Refraining from comment, because too much going on and too much system specific.

#3. Sometimes general principles apply in pressure sequences.

[Cyberyeti]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-November-04, 07:01, said:

On Hand 1, West could bid 4♣ over 3♥. That would probably be enough to get you there in comfort.

This would be what he'd do with AKxx for us so I know with xx, QJxx, AJxx, QJx that he's potentially generating the discard for the losing spade. Also 4♣ is not necessarily good news, as if he has the same honours, but 3-4 instead of 4-3 in the minors it's no play.

Quote

The auction in Hand 2 is a classic Acol problem. If you play a 2/1 response as forcing to 2NT or as promising a rebid then the direct 3♣ raise can show extras. If East tries that then West can afford to take it more slowly. It sounds very much as though the slam goes down on best defence as the cards actually were. Obviously the thing to take away from this hand is a discussion on whether 4♠ is any dead minimum or a picture bid.

Actually it doesn't go down, spades are 2-2 and ♣QJxxx are in front of the 10 so you simply drop the trumps and make 3 clubs after giving one up. The discussion to have is what 3♠ means, what 4♠ is follows from that. Our 2/1 doesn't promise another bid, hence a large part of the problem on this board.

Quote

I think I would have bid 5♦ over 4♥ with your hand on #3. 4♥ seems like a pretty serious call to me, since 4♣ must surely be a slam try when the option to double is there on a weaker hand with clubs. Change the ♥A to the ♦K and it looks better. Assuming 4♣ is standard rather than something like a conditional ask, the bidding can continue with an exchange of cue bids reaching 6 with more security. If 4♣ were a conditional ask, West would find out about the extras and 3 key cards and can even check for ♦K if they want before settling for the small slam.

4♣ would be natural and slammish but probably more likely to have heart losers and better diamonds, double would show spades for us. I didn't want to put pressure on partner to work out what 5♦ was, since the suit above our agreed suit is usually not a straight cue but asking in some form or other (KC at the 4 level, GSF at the 5 level in most auctions) and with diamonds being his suit too, I thought there was too much risk of a wheel coming off.

[FrancesHinden]

 Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-04, 07:46, said:

Actually it doesn't go down, spades are 2-2 and ♣QJxxx are in front of the 10 so you simply drop the trumps and make 3 clubs after giving one up. The discussion to have is what 3♠ means, what 4♠ is follows from that. Our 2/1 doesn't promise another bid, hence a large part of the problem on this board.

If Rho had remembered to make a Lightner double it would have gone down.

You have already answered your own question in that you have decided to play 3S as forcing so it seems clear that responder should have bid 3S. There was also no reason that East had to jump to 6S, why not make a slam try?
Slam is under 50% anyway.

[FrancesHinden]

 Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-04, 05:32, said:

We played a multiple teams event yesterday, there were 3 slam boards our way, 2 of them I just successfully punted the slam, one we didn't even sniff. Looking for better methods or just better bids to have a bit more confidence in what we were doing.

Our system is somewhat bent weak NT Acol with all suit openers showing 4.

---

2N was good 19-21 and I couldn't see any reason to go beyond 4♥ with my bald 11 with lots of black suit losers, slam is cold if trumps are 3-2.

On the first one opener can't bid 4H with that hand, 4H should show a minimum and he's got far too many controls. You can't bid it with any certainty after that but you at least have a chance.

[FrancesHinden]

 Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-04, 07:46, said:

4♣ would be natural and slammish but probably more likely to have heart losers and better diamonds, double would show spades for us. I didn't want to put pressure on partner to work out what 5♦ was, since the suit above our agreed suit is usually not a straight cue but asking in some form or other (KC at the 4 level, GSF at the 5 level in most auctions) and with diamonds being his suit too, I thought there was too much risk of a wheel coming off.

It's not a matter of asking for system improvements but of agreeing what bids in your current system mean. If you don't know what any bid means over 4H other than 6C, then you shouldn't be inventing more system.
p.s. if 4H showed a 'good' 5C bid with a heart control I shudder to think what a 'bad' 5C bid is. Opposite an Acol 2/1 he has a marginal game force never mind a slam try. Obviously East has a slam force opposite a proper good 5C bid and I'd be expecting grand to make more often than small to go off.

[Cyberyeti]

 FrancesHinden, on 2013-November-04, 15:55, said:

It's not a matter of asking for system improvements but of agreeing what bids in your current system mean. If you don't know what any bid means over 4H other than 6C, then you shouldn't be inventing more system.
p.s. if 4H showed a 'good' 5C bid with a heart control I shudder to think what a 'bad' 5C bid is. Opposite an Acol 2/1 he has a marginal game force never mind a slam try. Obviously East has a slam force opposite a proper good 5C bid and I'd be expecting grand to make more often than small to go off.

5♦ is the only awkward bid for us, what the others mean is clear. Since this is a slam opposite as little as xx, xxx, Kx, AKxxxx or QJxx, xxx, x, AKxxx I think it's worth a slam invite and disagree with your hand evaluation, particularly with partners' honours being unlikely to be in hearts.

Quote

If Rho had remembered to make a Lightner double it would have gone down.

The void was on lead.

[FrancesHinden]

 Cyberyeti, on 2013-November-04, 18:23, said:

5♦ is the only awkward bid for us, what the others mean is clear. Since this is a slam opposite as little as xx, xxx, Kx, AKxxxx or QJxx, xxx, x, AKxxx I think it's worth a slam invite and disagree with your hand evaluation, particularly with partners' honours being unlikely to be in hearts.

Both your sample hands are obvious slam tries if opener shows game forcing values.
Maybe it's the description of your methods that is wrong. Usually describing something as a "good 5C bid" means that it is stronger than just a game force. Given that opener could have something like Ax A AKxxxx Qxxx and responder could have Qxx Qxx xx AJxxx it seems a bit deep to call the sample hand too good simply to force game.

p.s. you asked about methods. Don't play opener's 4C bid over 3H a 'forcing and slammish'. You've given no way for opener to raise clubs in a non-game-forcing manner. How is responder supposed to tell the difference between a minimum opening bid and a 19-count?