[kenberg]

---

I'm South. This is hand 4 in a pick-up, he is unfamiliar to me. The first three boards have gone well.

Now 6♣ is probably not an ideal spot but
a. It's a good deal better than 6♥, since that slam requires that there be only 12 hearts in the deck and
b. hearts and clubs behave so 6♣ is unbeatable.


Down 1 in 6♥, I look up and partner is gone. Another thread discusses the relative importance of bidding versus cardplay. How about temperament? I can live with a bad result.

Comments on my choices are welcome. I suppose that partner's 3♣ was an attempt to see whether we should be in 4♥ or 6♥ and then his 4♥ was intended to shut us down in game. I took 3♣ as a suggestion we play in clubs (wild idea, I know).

[helene_t]

Not sure what I think of 6♣. I suppose we can assume no agreements about 4NT since otherwise you would have told us.

For all you know, p has not slam interest but just offers you the choice of game. 4NT could be an offer to play. Or it could be RKC for clubs. In the first case I think 5♣ is enough. Pass may be an option but 5♣ keeps the ball in the air just in case 4NT was not an offer to play. Then again, 5♣ won't be very helpful to p if 4NT is meant as asking for keycards. So OK it is probably fine to bid slam. Then you might as will bid 5♠ showing your keycards just in case p is looking for a grand slam.

[Bbradley62]

Certainly, this should not cause partner to leave without a pleasant comment upon departure. But...

There is another thread ("Your Highnest") about whether or not to raise 6H to 7H when it appears that it's likely that 7H will make. The first two of us who replied basically said "when partner is captain, he's captain". Your partner is captain after you open 1N, you should respect his signoff. Again, not cause for storming out on a p/u partner, but annoying nonetheless.

Where is the bad result? It looks like you played 6♣, which you say makes.

[kenberg]

I played 6♥. I wrote it wrong at first.

[Bbradley62]

My guess (and it is just that) would have been that partner expects your 4♠ bid to show slam interest despite his attempted signoff, with a super-max 1NT opener, a double ♣♥ fit and the ♠A. 4NT was therefore RKC in hearts, your "agreed" suit, and if you had shown only one keycard, pard would have signed off in 5♥. So, he's annoyed that you pulled his signoff and then gummed-up his subsequent RKC sequence.

With a pickup partner, go with the simplest answer, and play to win the post-mortem.

Conversely, if this auction occurred early in a potential long-term partnership, it would have led to an excellent discussion of your thought processes...

[kenberg]

Helene, right, we had no agreements about the meaning of 4NT. His card said 1430 but I was less than certain of what he thought the trump suit was, and also not certain he meant it as an asking bid. My thinking with 4♠ was that this was encouraging, and I would respect a 5♣ sign-off since this could well be on xx in diamonds and x in spades. Whatever 4NT was, I figured with my clubs the club slam should have some sort of play.

How common is this idea of transferring to hearts, bidding clubs, and then signing off (attempting to) in 4♥? I still thought clubs were trump.
Give partner a different hand, maybe
xx
AQxxx
x
Axxxx
and we certainly do not want to be in NT. 4♥ is iffy. 5♣ looks good, 6 possible. Change the Q of hearts to the K and the club slam looks to be on fairly well-frozen ice.

It did not really cross my mind that 4♥ was an announcement that the hand should be played in hearts (if this was the intent). But maybe 5♣ is enough, although it certainly does not show the ace of diamonds and KQxx of clubs.

It also seems to me that 6♥ is clearly wrong. With any decent three card heart holding I would have bid 3♥ over 3♣ so I guess I have good clubs and weak hearts.

I agree with the "simple is better" philosophy, even with regular partners. As for the post mortem, it's hard to pm with someone who isn't there.

[Siegmund]

Without agreements, 4C may well be the best 3rd bid you can find.

With agreements, I bid 3D over 3C: if I liked hearts, I would bid 3H to set trumps, if I hated both suits I would retreat to 3NT, if I bid a new suit I am inviting partner to investigate the possibility of 6C.

Whether 1N-2D,2H-3C,3D-3H is a cue in support of the agreed clubs or just showing a 6th heart, I dont know. But it does save one whole level of bidding before we have an accident involving 4NT.

[Bbradley62]

 kenberg, on 2011-February-26, 14:38, said:

How common is this idea of transferring to hearts, bidding clubs, and then signing off (attempting to) in 4♥?

Actually, I think I need to amend something I've now said twice... 4♥ should probably be a choice of games, showing 6-4. But I'd still read it as lack of slam interest, and certainly not 5-5.

[kenberg]

Ah yes, 3♦ over 3♣. Absolutely. I wasn't thinking.

[nigel_k]

Over 3♣, I agree with Siegmund that a new suit shows clubs. Without hearts or clubs you would just bid 3NT. But I prefer 3♠ to 3♦ on your hand because you want to play 3NT when partner has short spades, e.g. x AQxxx KJx Axxx.

Also, I think you have to allow for the possibilty that partner just has a slam try in hearts, e.g. xx AKJxxx Qx Axx. In a regular partnership you might agree that a transfer then 4♥ is a slam try (because you didn't use Texas), but in a pickup partnership I would just pass 4♥ because partner might not have clubs when he retreats immediately to 4♥.

But your partner's 4NT and 6♥ were the only two calls I really dislike.

[mike777]

Well if 4h and 4nt were both offers to play and stop bidding and you keep bidding with a minimum hand....

I guess late night north may lose patience.

Also prefer 3d over 3c as a cuebid agreeing clubs.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 Siegmund, on 2011-February-26, 14:51, said:

With agreements, I bid 3D over 3C: if I liked hearts, I would bid 3H to set trumps, if I hated both suits I would retreat to 3NT, if I bid a new suit I am inviting partner to investigate the possibility of 6C.

I've mentioned this agreement before ( by IanD ):
1NT - 2D!
2H - 3C
??
..3D! = cheapest new suit = 4 or 5c and only 2h
..3H = agree Hts, no interest in Cl
..3S = undefined
..3NT = no interest in Hts or Cl
..4C! = 4 or 5c AND 3h ( sweet ! )

[dcohio]

4H to me is choice of games 6/4.

If I had a reason to offer you a choice of slams, I'd have bid 5H showing 6/4 and asking you to bid 6C or 6H.

Since South took the action of cuebidding the only 1st/2nd rd control I'm lacking, after 4S I'd have bid 5NT (pick a slam) and lived with whatever action south took be it pass, 6C or 6H

However, South is by far too weak (minimum, shortness in partners long suit, sloooow tricks) to make the cuebid.

[kenberg]

 nigel_k, on 2011-February-26, 16:10, said:

Over 3♣, I agree with Siegmund that a new suit shows clubs. Without hearts or clubs you would just bid 3NT. But I prefer 3♠ to 3♦ on your hand because you want to play 3NT when partner has short spades, e.g. x AQxxx KJx Axxx.

Also, I think you have to allow for the possibilty that partner just has a slam try in hearts, e.g. xx AKJxxx Qx Axx. In a regular partnership you might agree that a transfer then 4♥ is a slam try (because you didn't use Texas), but in a pickup partnership I would just pass 4♥ because partner might not have clubs when he retreats immediately to 4♥.

But your partner's 4NT and 6♥ were the only two calls I really dislike.

I definitely see the point of 3♠ over 3♣. After 3♣ I first gave passing thought to 3NT but after a diamond lead I would need, as far as I could see, 8 more immediate tricks. At that time I was not yet thinking about slam. Bidding 3♠ would often get us to 3NT when it is right.

Myself, holding xx AKJxxx Qx Axx opposite 1NT, I would transfer to hearts and raise to four. If partner realizes that this is stronger than texas that would be nice but I would not risk confusion by bidding 3♣. The 6-4 choice of games option I need to think about. It seems to me that if he wants to be in 4♥ when I have two hearts and four clubs he should not screw around with the clubs. A 6-4 slam try appeals more to me but then still clubs may be (and was) the best strain.

I really do appreciate all these thoughts even though I am not entirely convinced. Mostly I have trouble seeing why partner would bid 3♣ if he wants to play in hearts when I have two small hearts and KQxx of clubs. Had he transferred to hearts and bid 4♦ I would assume hearts are trump and he has a stiff diamond. I would bid 4♥.


Anyway, thank you all for your thoughts.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

 kenberg, on 2011-February-26, 23:41, said:

Myself, holding xx AKJxxx Qx Axx opposite 1NT, I would transfer to hearts and raise to four. If partner realizes that this is stronger than texas that would be nice but I would not risk confusion by bidding 3♣.

Anyway, thank you all for your thoughts.

The "long Major, slammish" hands are a problem for rebids over partner's 1NT.

One solution I've toyed with ( for a seasoned partnership ) is to have 3C! = "maybe artificial".

This way for the Responder's hand above:
1NT - 2D!
2H - 3C!
3D! ( 2h but 4 or 5c ) - ??

3H! = long Ht hand, 3C! was artificial
3S! ( or higher ) = cuebid with real Cl suit

Thus, with Responder's 3H bid over 3D!, low-level cuebidding can commence which otherwise can't be achieved.

[MrAce]

I strongly disagree with those who believes 4♥ bid showed choice of games.

It is very hard to believe, one would transfer to ♥ with 6♥+♣ and want to only play game. Why didnt he just use texas xfer ? Why would someone look for an alternative 5 minor game when our side is known to have AT LEAST 8 card major suit and if he is not willing to go any further than just game ? It doesnt add up. None of the good players would give too much information to defense, just to seek and find (if there is ) a hand where 5 minor is superior to 4♥ when they hold 6 cards major.

He showed ♥+♣ and we definetely made sure we liked ♣ by 4♣ bid (we could have made this by 3♦/3♠ bid too but with a p/u pd i understand 4♣) At this point if pd had 5♥+4-5♣ and just game values with no slam interest he has to bid the game in ♣ ending auction, or if he started with big hands he needs to do something else. And 4♥ here can not be an offer to play anymore for the reasons i explained above.

[PetteriLem]

I completely agree with MrAce. Why on earth would someone offer 2 suits to play, while knowing that partner
will think twice before showing support for the minor suit, which may push auction overboard. 6♥ cries out
load as trump suit, if you think minor suit game is a genuine possibility, then dont start "I was only kidding sequence".

[PetteriLem]

I admit I was quite heated when I replied. What I wanted to say was that I agree with MrAce. What comes to the
actual hand. Responder has to show clubs, opener should raise them, because the clubs are great and he has the
worst hearts ever. And yes there is no turning back after 4♣, but you can be assured that 5♣ is
often a good contract. What to do after 4♣: in the unlikely case where slam interest was shown, responder
should bid 5♣. He has shown 6-4/5-5 (or better) with not so good hearts and a likely shortness, but needs
a lot from the opener. I am abit swayed should responder still be more optimistic. Now to the likely case where
only game interest was revealed. I would bid 4♦ as control. Direct 4♥ should show good hearts,
no diamond control, something useful in spade(s) and is absolutely forcing as clubs are the trump suit. I assume
that the pair is going to land on 5♣ when either of them bids it.

[Zelandakh]

Don, with hearts as the major I think there is a simpler solution to this. After 1NT - 2D - 2H,

2♠ = 2/4NT invite; or clubs; or strong (1-suited) slam try in hearts (Opener responds 2N = min, 3C = max)
3♣ = diamonds

After 1NT - 2D - 2H - 3C or 1NT - 2D - 2H - 2S - 2NT - 3C, then 3D is a flag showing no fit, 3H obviously shows a heart fit and other bids show a fit in the minor, diamonds for sequence 1 and clubs for sequence 2. You get extra space where you need it as well as solving the issue of 1-suited slam hands.

As for the OP, one of the first things I learned in transfers was never to show the minor in these sequence unless willing to goto (at least) 5 of the minor. 4C unambiguously sets clubs so 4H should really be a cue rather than an attempt to play. In other words North has shown a good hand for slam in clubs. In the context of this auction 6H is unfathomable. I like Nigel's choice of 3♠ alot but I am not sure I would choose it over 4♣ with a random pick-up partner and no agreements.

[kenberg]

I am really glad to see that at least some others think that clubs were trump and that 4♥ was not a sudden desire to play 4♥.

Part of my reason for posting was to comment on issues of temperament. Of course heading for the door in a huff is, I guess, just part of online play but I get tired of it. I'm not all that sensitive to criticism if someone wants to talk, and maybe we both could learn something.

In this auction, after 3♣, it took me at least a bit of thinking to rule out 3NT. After all, I stop both spades and diamonds. But one stop is not always enough. So I think 3♠ would have been a good call. It denies hearts and offers partner an opportunity to bid 3NT with something in diamonds. On a different responder's hand, this may be just what is needed.

As the auction went, there were the usual "now what's that mean?" moments with a pick-up (and sometimes with a regular partner). Was 4♥ an offer to play? This seemed wrong. Passing might leave us in a stupid 4♥ when a small slam in clubs was on ice. What to do? 5♣ seemed insufficient. 6♣ seemed unilateral. OK, I try 4♠ and see if partner has any ideas. This gets 4NT. What? If it's 1430 I have two keys if clubs are trump. But are they? Hmm. OK, 6♣ it is, maybe I'll get lucky if needed. The good news is that hearts and clubs are 3-2 with the king onside, the bad news is that I am in 6♥.

Anyway, I would have happily discussed this with pard if he stuck around. Part of the discussion would have been that if the Q of hearts were the K, 6♣ is a favorite and 6♥ still sucks big time. With the Q being the Q, I need some luck, but I have been a good boy and the force was with me.