[S2000magic]

Dealer holds:

♠ K J 9 8 6 4
♥ A K 2
♦ 6
♣ A 4 2

Partner holds:

♠ A Q
♥ 10 8 7 6
♦ A K Q 10 9 4 3
♣ ---

2/1, 1430, relatively new partnership, opponents pass throughout.

(Edit: No XRKCB.)

[Zelandakh]

For me this looks like a simple relay hand without any breaks required.

1♠ = 10-17, 5+ spades, unbalanced
... - 1NT = INV+ relay
2♠ = max, 6+ spades, GF
... - 2NT = relay
3♣ = 3 hearts
... - 3♦ = relay
3♥ = 3 clubs
... - 3♠ = relay
3NT = 6313
... - 4♣ = relay
4NT = 6 controls
... - 7NT


I would guess it is somewhat messier in 2/1 but will leave it to someone that plays it to give a definitive auction. As an aside, if you want auctions from your chosen methods it is probably also a good idea to say whether you have XRKCB in your arsenal for slam hands where one or both hands has a void.

[kenrexford]

Depends on judgment calls. One possibility:

1♠-2♦
2♠(6)-3♠(agreed)
4♣(control)-4♦(two of top three diamonds)
4♥(control)-5♣(Exclusion)
5♠(two no Q)-5NT(Kings?)
6♥(heart King)-7♦
P

Permutations include:

1. Opener decides is Serious.
2. Opener decides to show the club Ace over 5NT.
3. After (2.), Responder gets tricky with a 6♦ "ask," wanting to maintain control and hoping to induce a 6♥ call.
4. Responder opts against Exclusion.
5. Opener converts to 7NT.
6. Responder blasts 4NT without cues in a semi-zoom, giving chance to sneak a slam if missin

[kenrexford]

Depends on judgment calls. One possibility:

1♠-2♦
2♠(6)-3♠(agreed)
4♣(control)-4♦(two of top three diamonds)
4♥(control)-5♣(Exclusion)
5♠(two no Q)-5NT(Kings?)
6♥(heart King)-7♦
P

Permutations include:

1. Opener decides is Serious.
2. Opener decides to show the club Ace over 5NT.
3. After (2.), Responder gets tricky with a 6♦ "ask," wanting to maintain control and hoping to induce a 6♥ call.
4. Responder opts against Exclusion.
5. Opener converts to 7NT.
6. Responder blasts 4NT without cues in a semi-zoom, giving chance to sneak a slam if missing a heart control.

[S2000magic]

Zelandakh, on 2012-February-16, 08:06, said:

As an aside, if you want auctions from your chosen methods it is probably also a good idea to say whether you have XRKCB in your arsenal for slam hands where one or both hands has a void.

Good point. No XRKCB.

[benlessard]

Using chapi http://bridge.downag...hp?bod=1CP2CP2D


1C-2C (D transfers)
2D-3D (7D+ club void)
4C(S keycards)---5C-(2+Q+K of D,no Kh)
5D (Qof D ?)--- 5S (Q of D) no Qof H
5Nt pas----6D (i have only 2S/ive got 8D or 7 solid)
7Nt

[S2000magic]

While I appreciate that other methods will facilitate bidding these hands, it would be more helpful (to me and my partner, at least) to see sequences that employ the methods I outlined.

Thanks.

[gnasher]

1♠-2♦
2♠-4♦ (setting trumps)
4NT-5♠ (RKCB)
7♦-7NT

At the end, North bids 7♦ because it might be necessary to ruff the spades good. South should probably convert to 7NT because ♠Q suggests that no ruffing will be required. He knows North has six spades, because North obviously has extras to justify taking control over 4♦.

As South I wouldn't choose to agree spades early, because of the risk that partner will insist on playing in the suit. It's very unlikely that spades will play better than diamonds - if the diamonds aren't good, it won't help us to play in spades, because we won't be able to set up and cash the diamond suit. And spades might play a lot worse than diamonds if my club holding gets forced at trick one: partner hasn't promised KJ10 of the suit.

[S2000magic]

gnasher, on 2012-February-16, 09:03, said:

1♠-2♦
2♠-4♦ (setting trumps)
4NT-5♠ (RKCB)
7♦-7NT

At the end, North bids 7♦ because it might be necessary to ruff the spades good. South should probably convert to 7NT because ♠Q suggests that no ruffing will be required. He knows North has six spades, because North obviously has extras to justify taking control over 4♦.

As South I wouldn't choose to agree spades early, because of the risk that partner will insist on playing in the suit. It's very unlikely that spades will play better than diamonds - if the diamonds aren't good, it won't help us to play in spades, because we won't be able to set up and cash the diamond suit. And spades might play a lot worse than diamonds if my club holding gets forced at trick one: partner hasn't promised KJ10 of the suit.

I like it. Thanks!

[Zelandakh]

It would be nice if you gave a little more detail Ben so we can all follow your auction. For example, is 2♣ GF or any strength? Does it deny a major? Can it be 2-suited? And so on. The 3♦ bid shows a club void but presumably could also be 1390? What about a side 4 card suit? When North asks for key cards does this agree spades or is it just a means to an end? How do you get out if South does have the 1390 hand and not enough for slam? Where you say 5♥, did you really mean 5♠ or do you also have your own version of spiral scan - if so, what would the bids have been with ♥Q and no ♦Q, or with both, or neither? South's diamonds are solid opposite a singleton but not a void - did North show a diamond by bidding 4♣ rather than making an exclusion call?

I could probably come up with additional questions if I thought about it at all. It is only that when I tried to follow the bidding I found it was impossible. I should note that I sometimes make this mistake too - in my sequence the 2♠ bid denies a side 4 card suit but I forgot to mention it. It is unfortunately all too easy to do and there is little point in posting such auctions if readers cannot follow them easily. I personally do find other methods interesting to read through and compare. Hopefully others do too!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-16, 07:49, said:

Dealer holds:

♠ K J 9 8 6 4
♥ A K 2
♦ 6
♣ A 4 2

Partner holds:

♠ A Q
♥ 10 8 7 6
♦ A K Q 10 9 4 3
♣ ---

2/1, 1430, relatively new partnership, opponents pass throughout.

(Edit: No XRKCB.)

As Responder, I'm worried that Opener may have a ♦-void .
So, I'm thinking about a small slam if slam is warranted.
However, here in a Splinter auction, Opener may take control and also decide to stop in a small slam .

1S ...... - 2D! ( 2/1 GF )
2S/2NT ( whichever you use to show extra ♠ length )

- 4C! ( splinter )

4NT ( Opener is ready for RKC for ♠, 1430 )

- 5NT ( 2 + void somewhere; obviously ♣)

6S
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Edit: If Responder decides to forgo the "void reply" and show 2 + ♠Q instead, then Opener will be inclined to ask for Kings ( confirming that our side has all the key cards ) :
4NT - 5S
5NT - 7D ( showing a solid source of ♦ tricks such as A K Q J x , but A K Q-7th should suffice )
7S

This post has been edited by TWO4BRIDGE: 2012-February-16, 12:48

[kenrexford]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-16, 08:45, said:

While I appreciate that other methods will facilitate bidding these hands, it would be more helpful (to me and my partner, at least) to see sequences that employ the methods I outlined.

Thanks.

In all fairness, you have not really laid out any methods. 2/1 plus 1430 plus "new partnership" does not say very much. If you have no agreements as to (1) whether repeating spades promises six, (2) how to agree spades, (3) whether cues are used and if so what type, and things like that, then any auction is a guess.

You start out with two bids that are easy -- opening 1♠ and responding 2♦. Everything else is a wild ass guess.

[S2000magic]

kenrexford, on 2012-February-16, 13:20, said:

In all fairness, you have not really laid out any methods. 2/1 plus 1430 plus "new partnership" does not say very much. If you have no agreements as to (1) whether repeating spades promises six, (2) how to agree spades, (3) whether cues are used and if so what type, and things like that, then any auction is a guess.

You start out with two bids that are easy -- opening 1♠ and responding 2♦. Everything else is a wild ass guess.

Fair enough, if you'll concede that replies such as Zelandakh's simple relay system clearly violate the methods - sketchy as they are - that I laid out.

[mikeh]

gnasher, on 2012-February-16, 09:03, said:

1♠-2♦
2♠-4♦ (setting trumps)
4NT-5♠ (RKCB)
7♦-7NT

At the end, North bids 7♦ because it might be necessary to ruff the spades good. South should probably convert to 7NT because ♠Q suggests that no ruffing will be required. He knows North has six spades, because North obviously has extras to justify taking control over 4♦.

As South I wouldn't choose to agree spades early, because of the risk that partner will insist on playing in the suit. It's very unlikely that spades will play better than diamonds - if the diamonds aren't good, it won't help us to play in spades, because we won't be able to set up and cash the diamond suit. And spades might play a lot worse than diamonds if my club holding gets forced at trick one: partner hasn't promised KJ10 of the suit.

My caffeine content may be too low for me to follow this, but I don't understand the 5♠ response to keycard. Are spades trump? if so, when did that happen?

I like the auction through to 4N. The diamond suit is the absolute worst that can be held for a 4♦ rebid, as I understand normal usage, but it is a very descriptive bid.

There is logic behind the notion that 4N is not keycard in the typical sense, since responder has already shown AKQ in diamonds, but I would assume normal keycard responses absent a specialized agreement, so either 5♣ or 5♦ would seem the right step, depending on 1430/0314 agreements.

Then I agree that 7N seems warranted over the 7♦ call for the reasons given.

I am therefore in complete agreement with your approach but was confused by the 5♠ suggestion.

[gnasher]

mikeh, on 2012-February-16, 15:47, said:

My caffeine content may be too low for me to follow this, but I don't understand the 5♠ response to keycard. Are spades trump? if so, when did that happen?

No, diamonds are trumps. I just forgot that I had ♠A.

Having thought about it a bit more, I'm not competely convinced by my auction. It will be hard to get back to spades opposite something like KJxxxx Kx xx Axx, though maybe we'd get to 6NT.

Quote

There is logic behind the notion that 4N is not keycard in the typical sense, since responder has already shown AKQ in diamonds,

Yes, there's a lot to be said for assuming ♦AK and using the extra space to find out how solid the "solid" suit actually is. The queen isn't necessarily a given, because it's reasonable to treat AKJxxxxx as a solid suit.

[Cyberyeti]

If you play SJS there is no real problem, we play a form that gives us a slight issue:

1♠-3♦ (either the old fashioned single suited rock crusher or 5 good diamonds and 4 reasonable spades GF)
3♠-4♦ (single suited ♦)
4♥(KB)-4♠(0/3)
4N(can't be 0 and bid 3♦, Q♦ ?)-5♣(yes and a club control)
5♠(looking for ♠ K or Q for grand)-7♦
7♠ (or 7N at MPs)

[kenrexford]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-16, 15:30, said:

Fair enough, if you'll concede that replies such as Zelandakh's simple relay system clearly violate the methods - sketchy as they are - that I laid out.

True. Most people do not default to relay systems without discussion.

[gszes]

S2000magic, on 2012-February-16, 07:49, said:

Dealer holds:

♠ K J 9 8 6 4
♥ A K 2
♦ 6
♣ A 4 2

Partner holds:

♠ A Q
♥ 10 8 7 6
♦ A K Q 10 9 4 3
♣ ---

2/1, 1430, relatively new partnership, opponents pass throughout.

(Edit: No XRKCB.)

1s
2d
2n* (slight lie 1 dia but all stoppers and the spades
arent that great)
3d slam interest
3s 6+ spades headed by at lease A or K slammish hand
4c cue
4h cue
4n rkc
5h 2 w/o
5n kings
6h heart k
7n rather than "safer" 7d (ie no disaster in case
dia dont run) because 7n might still make by running
spades.

*In most 2/1 systems 2s does not promise 6 spades it is
merely a waiting bid that is unable to bid 2n for ex.
The bidding sequence is based on the assumption that dia
is the trump suit since responder did not bid 3s over 2n.

[Fluffy]

andy got my sequence on this one as well

[Fluffy]

gnasher, on 2012-February-16, 16:12, said:

Having thought about it a bit more, I'm not competely convinced by my auction. It will be hard to get back to spades opposite something like KJxxxx Kx xx Axx, though maybe we'd get to 6NT.

ahhh now you dissapoint me

On my second bid I am not thinking about playing in NT, nor I like the idea of having to ruff with ♠AQ, I think 4♦ is clear.