[Hanoi5]

They're red, we're white:

♠A8
♥AKT9x
♦8x
♣9xxx

1♣-(2♠)-3♥-(Pa)
4♦-(Pa)-???

MP's

[Fluffy]

The worse I can think about is AQ KQ in his long suits and that is already a playable slam, so I'd bid 6♣, there is no way to fit clubs and ask for keycards that I know.

[aguahombre]

gonna give it a try with 4S, enroute to 6C.

[sfi]

Fluffy, on 2013-July-11, 18:13, said:

The worse I can think about is AQ KQ in his long suits and that is already a playable slam, so I'd bid 6♣, there is no way to fit clubs and ask for keycards that I know.

Reasonable as far as it goes. But there is no reason to deny partner the chance to investigate further by unilaterally setting the contract. 4♠ for me, with a fallback position of bidding 6♣ later if partner doesn't so anything interesting.

[Hanoi5]

And how does 4♠ mean clubs instead of diamonds?

[aguahombre]

Hanoi5, on 2013-July-11, 21:27, said:

And how does 4♠ mean clubs instead of diamonds?

Partner will assume clubs and not blast in Diamonds. If it was Diamonds after all, the 4S bidder will correct. Can't correct to lower suit from higher one, and hopefully the guy with the two suits has the brain to know that.

[gnasher]

4♠ is a slam-try in something. The something will usually be one of partner's suits, but I suppose it might be hearts too. If he's accepting the slam try, he should jump to 6♣, to allow us to tell him what trumps are. That's not great, but it's unavoidable.

I wouldn't insist on slam with this. I've already game-forced and now I'm making a slam try. That seems plenty on an 11-count with a potentially wasted king. Partner hasn't shown any great strength - he could just have x x KQJxx KQJxxx.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2013-July-12, 02:50

[MinorKid]

IMO partner have shown reverse strength so unlikely to have ace-less hand. With x x KQJxx KQJxxx OR xx xx KQJx KQJxx I guess most player would start 1♦.

Agree with fluffy that we have playable slam, partner may have something like xxx - AKJxx AKQxx (or more)
OR Just xxx J AQJx AQJxx which is a decision between 6 or 7. What's more it seems the minor honors are on favorable side to partner.

Agree with aguahombre's 4♠ seem the way to go.
Partner bid 5♣ -> 6♣
Partner bid 6♣ -> 7♣

Partner bid 5♦ -> 6♣
Partner bid 6♦ -> 7♣

Partner bid 4NT -> Blackwood

[gszes]

There is an awful lot of confidence here that p is at least 55 in the minors and slam oriented.
I am very unsure this is the correct view. IMO the 4d bid is much more likely to be a cue bid for
hearts (the 3h bidder is unlimited) rather than a natural suit and a hand worth 20 plus. The
main reason for this is two fold.

P could just as easily opened 1d and later intended to rebid 3c (game forcing). P also could
have cue bid 3s with both minors to see if we were capable of bidding 3n. Since neither of
these two happend p has to be at least 56 in the minors (not necessarily slammish since
you promised decent values when you bid 3h) OR they have heart support and are cue
bidding in case YOU have slam interest. The odds of 56 in the minors are pretty darn slim
and it is much more likely p is cue bidding with heart support.

If we picture p with a hand like xx QJxx Axx AKxx p has great trump support lots of controls
and will feel compelled to cue bid rather than merely bid 4h since thy are close to minimum.
The simple 2s preempt has left us in a difficult spot since opposite the pictured hand above
the 5 level is too high (though making 5c might work). So do we cue bid or not. IMO we are
stuck and have to cue bid since the imagined hand above is essentially the worst case
scenario. We cue bid 4s and see what happens next. The nice part about the 4s cue bid is
it lets p know we were not strong enough to take control of the bidding though all suits are
apparently controlled. This information alone limits our hand and may save our side from
overbidding. It also keeps the bidding alive in case p is stong and wishes to go slamming.

Preempts work keep doing them.

[Vampyr]

MinorKid, on 2013-July-12, 05:40, said:

IMO partner have shown reverse strength

What would partner have bid with a weaker hand? We have, after all, forced to game; it seems unreasonable for partner not to be able to show his second suit along the way.

[mikeh]

I agree with the ambiguous 4♠: this is a slam try of some kind, or even a slam force. But it carries no information about strain.

However, uncertainty looms.

4N by him would be what? Can it be keycard? I would have thought not, since we have no trump suit, but he might be thinking we'd cue'd in support of diamonds. I'd actually take it to be a punt: essentially buying time to let us clarify our intentions, but I have no confidence that we'd be on the same page.

5♣: a suggestion that he has no slam interest and we are to pass or correct? Or a forward-going cuebid?

5N: surely pick a slam, but is this just about which minor, or does it bring hearts back into the picture: say 1=2=4=6 or 0=2=5=6 with Qx in hearts?

6♣: is this simply pass or correct in the minors? How can we determine what 6♣ means if we aren't sure what 5N would have meant?

I think part of the problem is that we are completely unlimited at our second turn. We can't make a forcing 4♥ or indeed any attempt to get to small or grand in hearts. And while he lacks a 2♣ opening, he could have a very good hand, while not yet knowing that we are minimum (a nice, useful minimum but we could certainly hold more). Accordingly he has to keep in mind, as do we, that partner might be interested in grand. That makes limiting the actions by either party into just being about small slam as inappropriate.

I think 5♣ by him is a forward going move, but that works only if 4N is the punt/stall/,mark-time action.

[mikeh]

gszes, on 2013-July-12, 10:07, said:

There is an awful lot of confidence here that p is at least 55 in the minors

You are perhaps the only person currently posting to or reading BBF who thinks opener could be 55 minors.

For the rest of us, partner has promised longer clubs than diamonds, and unless you are playing some form of canapé, we're correct. This is not merely an opinion.

[Winstonm]

Slam is the easy part - trying to get partner's input on which slam is the hard part.

I try 4S and hope partner can keycard.

[CSGibson]

gszes, on 2013-July-12, 10:07, said:

IMO the 4d bid is much more likely to be a cue bid for
hearts (the 3h bidder is unlimited) rather than a natural suit and a hand worth 20 plus.

This is patently ridiculous. Partner would not make a space-consuming and potentially confusing cue-bid of 4♦ when he could more clearly start a slam interest sequence with 3♠. 4♦ is natural.

I think the right action on this hand is 4♠. I disagree with MikeH (warning sign that I might be about to say something stupid), however, on how to use 4N vs 5♣ - I think 4N is forward going, and 5♣ is a minimum, after which I would pass.

[gszes]

mikeh, on 2013-July-12, 10:48, said:

You are perhaps the only person currently posting to or reading BBF who thinks opener could be 55 minors.

For the rest of us, partner has promised longer clubs than diamonds, and unless you are playing some form of canapé, we're correct. This is not merely an opinion.

i am sorry the first phrase of my opinion gave you the wrong impression of my opinion. The headline of
the topic was partner is 2 suited and we have A AK. I do not think p is likely to be 2 suited and I went on
to explain they had to be at least 56 to bid this way (and feel it is very unlikely since they are much more
likely to have heart support and are cuebidding wither because they are slam interested or they think we
might be (unlimited for our 3h bid).

[PhilKing]

gszes, on 2013-July-12, 12:26, said:

i am sorry the first phrase of my opinion gave you the wrong impression of my opinion. The headline of
the topic was partner is 2 suited and we have A AK. I do not think p is likely to be 2 suited and I went on
to explain they had to be at least 56 to bid this way (and feel it is very unlikely since they are much more
likely to have heart support and are cuebidding wither because they are slam interested or they think we
might be (unlimited for our 3h bid).

Partner is more likely to have been dealt a heart raise with a diamond control, but for most of us, there is a 0% chance that he would bid 4♦ with such a hand.

So unlikely as it may seem, when partner bids clubs and diamonds, he has, of all things, clubs and diamonds. I don't think it promises 5-6. Partner could have: ♠xx ♥x ♦AKJx ♣AKxxxx, since it would be unreasonable to expect us to introduce Qxxx over 4♣.

[cherdano]

Winstonm, on 2013-July-12, 11:46, said:

Slam is the easy part - trying to get partner's input on which slam is the hard part.

I try 4S and hope partner can keycard.

Which slam? I hope you are talking about the level, not the strain here, I prefer 10-card fits over 5-2 fits or 6NT with Ax as the only stopper in their suit.

Meanwhile, I don't understand when partner promised extra strength, we forced to game, he is allowed to bid naturally with a 1156 hand that was planning to bid 1C-1M-2C. Of course, in that case insisting on slam would be madness.

[gszes]

CSGibson, on 2013-July-12, 12:15, said:

This is patently ridiculous. Partner would not make a space-consuming and potentially confusing cue-bid of 4♦ when he could more clearly start a slam interest sequence with 3♠. 4♦ is natural.

I think the right action on this hand is 4♠. I disagree with MikeH (warning sign that I might be about to say something stupid), however, on how to use 4N vs 5♣ - I think 4N is forward going, and 5♣ is a minimum, after which I would pass.

The down side of a 3s cue bid followed by 4h (assuming p does not rebid 4h) is how
does one show a heart raise with and w/o a spade control if it is being used to show
both. Also why would 3s have to be a heart support cue rather than an attempt to
play 3n?? I think the target you are trying to hit with 4d being natural is far too small
and we may be much better off not worrying about a dia suit that was so subordinate
to clubs (by length and/or quality), that we would feel compelled to open 1c vs the much
more natural 1d, we would be much better off not trying to show it at the 4 level but
that's another story. Assuming 4d could be either dia or a heart cue may leave us in
limbo but it also leaves all contracts still on the table including 3n when it is right.

it is these types of hands where strong partnership agreements are needed.

[mikeh]

CSGibson, on 2013-July-12, 12:15, said:

I think the right action on this hand is 4♠. I disagree with MikeH (warning sign that I might be about to say something stupid), however, on how to use 4N vs 5♣ - I think 4N is forward going, and 5♣ is a minimum, after which I would pass.

I don't think it is 'stupid' to think of 4N as forward going. I think there is an advantage to playing the way I suggested, however, primarily because we may prefer, with a forward-going hand, to be able to make a cuebid, and the most common cue we'd want to make would be in clubs. It is for that reason that I suggested that 5♣ ought to be a cue (much as I hate auctions in which we haven't yet agreed trump) but recognized that we cannot use it in this manner unless 4N is a stall.

If the issue is slam or game, I think your idea works at least as well as mine. However, while I think the game/slam decision is important, the auction is such that partner is almost unlimited and, as far as partner is concerned, we are completely unlimited. This means that we have, imo, to consider that, regardless of our current intentions, partner will interpret all calls in the context of keeping all levels in play. I happen to think that 4N stall and 5♣ cue, and thus real slam interest, works more effectively than 4N forward going but silent on specific controls and 5♣ (essentially) pass or correct absent a huge hand.

Having said that, I often use 4N , in minor slam explorations, as 'forward-going, too good to sign off'. The main difference between those auctions and this one is that in the former there is no uncertainty as to trump, so we both know what 5m means. There is something to be said for assigning similar meanings to calls in similar auctions.

I think this is an interesting, if esoteric, area

[Winstonm]

cherdano, on 2013-July-12, 12:36, said:

Which slam? I hope you are talking about the level, not the strain here, I prefer 10-card fits over 5-2 fits or 6NT with Ax as the only stopper in their suit.

Meanwhile, I don't understand when partner promised extra strength, we forced to game, he is allowed to bid naturally with a 1156 hand that was planning to bid 1C-1M-2C. Of course, in that case insisting on slam would be madness.

Yes, I mean level of slam, small or grand. On that, we need partner's input about quality of trumps.

As to the latter, it simply makes little sense to reverse without extra values, even under these conditions because it consumes so my room for preference. If partner is minimum, Qx, xx, KQxx, KQxxx, I would much prefer 3S over 3H or even 4C - just not 4D. If partner were interested in diamonds, he can bid 4D over 4C or 3S.