[Cyberyeti]

RSClyde, on 2013-January-07, 11:06, said:

Why are people saying that this isn't a good slam? It's certainly not cold as there is some handling, but I'd definitely want to be there, and no it doesn't depend on a spade finesse.

Try actually reading the posts, the quote was:

Even if S bids 4♣ over 3♥, how do you fancy distinguishing S's hand from xxx, AKQxx, x, AJxx where slam is not great ?

And on that hand on a spade lead, you do stand and fall with the spade finesse.

[RSClyde]

[

[Lord Molyb]

valuable contribution

[bigbenvic]

Lord Molyb, on 2013-January-10, 15:43, said:

valuable contribution

I don't disagree with his last post :-)

[Zelandakh]

Don, I think you can improve information exchange by combining the first 2 options in the follow-ups. That is

1♥ - 2NT; 3♣ - 3♦
==
3♥ = spade shortage
3♠ = diamond shortage, min
... - 3NT = asks for spade control
... - 4♣ = asks for second club honour
... - 4♦ = asks if diamond loser
3NT = diamond shortage, max, no spade control
... - 4♣ = asks for second club honour
... - 4♦ = asks if diamond loser
4♣ = diamond shortage, max, spade control, no second club honour
... - 4♦ = asks if diamond loser
4♦ = diamond shortage, max, spade control, second club honour, diamond loser
4♥ = diamond shortage, max, spade control, second club honour, no diamond loser


Note that the same scheme also helps with the problem set forth by Cyberyeti.

1♥ - 2NT; 3♦ - 3♥
==
3♠ = min
3NT = max, no spade control
4♣ = max, spade control, no club control
4♦ = max, spade control, club control, diamond loser
4♥ = max, spade control, club control, no diamond loser

Unfortunately not perfectly though, since no loser might be a singleton ace or a void. As usual, that is probably more an advertisement for not splintering with a singleton ace than for changing methods to distinguish it when you do.

FWiiW, I think this is a tough hand without some methods, even with for that matter. It is difficult for North to know if half of their hand is working. South might have KJx/KQxxxx/x/QJx for 3♦ and a 4♣ cue might be based on Jxx/KQxxxxx/x/AQ.

[Bbradley62]

bigbenvic, on 2013-January-06, 17:14, said:

I would splinter, so auction might go
1h 3c
3d* 3s* (*cues)
4c* 5h**
6h
<<snip>>
So I blame north for not splintering (unless they don't play splinters) say 50%
<<snip>>

What if it's neither (a) nor (b)? Being non-expert players, they probably play that 1H-3C is a jump shift (either weak or strong, depending on their agreement) and that a splinter requires 1H-4C ?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zelandakh, on 2013-January-16, 03:21, said:

Don, I think you can improve information exchange by combining the first 2 options in the follow-ups.

Thx Zel..... I'm going to look at it more thoroughly later .

I also, corrected my mistakes in my post # 17 ... [ I inadvertently put the ♥ symbol instead of the ♣ symbol for the 3NT! , 4C!, and 4D! rebids ...) Now it correctly shows the 2nd ♣ honor ( or not ) in Opener's 2nd suit [ ♣ ] .

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zel.....
Note that Opener's :
3C! guarantees shortness in ♠ or ♦ [ besides showing 4 ( or 5 )♣ heading by the A or K ] .

After the - 3D! ( ask ) :
3S! ( 2nd step ) = ♦ shortness, "bad" hand since I could not use the 3rd, 4th or 5th steps ; thus denying a 2nd ♣-honor and denying a ♠-Ctrl.

How about this improvement:
3S! - 3NT! = asks about ♦-shortness
??
.. 4C = stiff
.. 4D = void
.. 4H = stiff Ace

EDIT: Another option over 3S!
3S! - 4C = asks if ♠ is doubleton or tripleton :
??
.. 4D = worthless tripleton ♠
.. 4H = worthless doubleton ♠ which can be important for slammish hands .

This post has been edited by TWO4BRIDGE: 2013-January-17, 14:33

[bigbenvic]

Bbradley62, on 2013-January-16, 10:52, said:

What if it's neither (a) nor (b)? Being non-expert players, they probably play that 1H-3C is a jump shift (either weak or strong, depending on their agreement) and that a splinter requires 1H-4C ?

Then I wouldn't splinter! I'd just bid 1♠, hey a 4-4 fit might play better than the 5-4 one! But I also get more room to find out about partners hand.

Another way there -
1h 1s
2c 2d* (4th suit GF)
2s 3h** (set trumps not a cue)
4c 4d
4h 4nt
If 5c is 0 or 3 then
5c 5d+ (You have Q♥)
6d++ 6h (Yes + 2nd ♦ control ie no K♠ or K♣)

If 5d is 0 or 3 then I think you have a tough choice, he's 3514 with 3 keycards, A♣ A♦ & either A or K♥ and enough to cue over 3♥ so not a washout. I'd bid it but with fingers crossed.

[Zelandakh]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-January-17, 11:57, said:

3C! guarantees shortness in ♠ or ♦ [ besides showing 4 ( or 5 )♣ heading by the A or K ] .

After the - 3D! ( ask ) :
3S! ( 2nd step ) = ♦ shortness, "bad" hand since I could not use the 3rd, 4th or 5th steps ; thus denying a 2nd ♣-honor and denying a ♠-Ctrl.

I am not sure why a bad hand cannot also contain a second club honour or a spade control. What about xxx/Jxxxx/A/KQxx, Kxx/Jxxxx/A/Kxxx or even Kxx/Qxxxx/x/KQxx? I think the most important pieces of information here are (in order of importance): a) good or bad hand for slam generally (Frivolous/Serious); b) the control situation in the side suits; and c) details of the splinter suit. There are 4 steps and 4 pieces of (binary) information to exchange. So any scheme that assigns the first step to good/bad, the second and third steps to side suits, and the fourth step to the splinter suit should be good. If you can think of something that is more important to you than singleton/void or 0 loser/1 loser in the splinter suit then by all means include that instead. The thing is to understand how much space is available and thereby how many bits of information can be exchanged, and once you know this to have a systematic way of assigning the bids that works in all relevant auctions.

[JLOGIC]

I'm like 100 % sure I would miss this slam. Oh well

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zelandakh, on 2013-January-18, 03:06, said:

I am not sure why a bad hand cannot also contain a second club honour or a spade control. What about :
xxx    Jxxxx    A    KQxx
Kxx    Jxxxx    A    Kxxx    or even
Kxx    Qxxxx    x    KQxx    ?

Those are definitely BAD openers.... and I don't think I'd open.
[EDIT: I'd probably open the 2nd one ]

This post has been edited by TWO4BRIDGE: 2013-January-19, 06:32