[Trump Echo]

In this morning's paper and online, Frank Stewart has an article with his usual Daily Question.

http://www.baronbarc...14/December2014

Most of the time I agree with what he says, but this time I don't. I'm referring to the Daily Question at the bottom of the article. Your opinion please?

You hold:

♠ AJ973
♥ A92
♦ 1074
♣ A6

Partner holds:

♠ 2
♥ KQ106
♦ AKQ652
♣ 32

You open 1 Spade. Partner responds 2 Diamonds.

You bid 2 NT.

In my system, this last call would show a balanced hand, stops in all unbid suits, and 13-16 hcps. Maybe it's different in Stewart's system.

What is partner's next call?

It seems to me that partner should see the full fit in Diamonds, revalue, see the good chance for slam in Diamonds, and he should check for Aces with Gerber. But Stewart has my partner bidding 3 Hearts. I don't agree with this call.

Nonetheless, that's partner's second call. So what is opener's next bid?

I would bid 3 NT, but Stewart claims opener should bid 4 Diamonds (support) or better yet, 4 Clubs, a cue bid, indirectly supporting Diamonds.

I don't see why this makes sense, given the hand that my partner holds. Because if partner held this hand, he'd have not bid 3 Hearts. He'd have bid Gerber. Because although it's remotely possible we could have a 4-4 fit in Hearts, it's highly unlikely and it risks missing a slam in Diamonds after opener calls 3 NT.

And of course, after the 3 NT call, this makes checking for Aces potentially confusing even if partner wanted to slam.

Comments please. Thanks

[manudude03]

I agree with the 3H bid. Responder doesn't know that opener has 3 aces, and if he asks for aces via gerber, he is badly placed opposite a 1 or 2 ace reply. By bidding 3H first, and then 4D over a potential signoff, he is telling opener that values in those suits are much more useful than values outside.

As for why 4C should agree diamonds, it is something worth discussing in your partnership, but the idea is that opener has already denied 4 hearts, so there can't be a guaranteed fit in hearts unless you play 3H as showing 6D and 5H.

[Fluffy]

you have a 6-4 so you show your 6-4 and partner evaluates. Partner won't often have 3 aces, pretty often he will have a bunch of useless (for slam purposes) black honors that serve only as stoppers.

[Zelandakh]

Try bidding

♠AJxxx
♥Axx
♦xx
♣QJT

opposite

♠2
♥KQTx
♦AKQxxx
♣xx

And then note that Opener can have much worse than 2 aces. Promoting the misuse of Gerber is not something I would hope to see in a newspaper column anytime soon. Read Fluffy's comment...digest...learn.

More to the point is to know what bidding system was in use. If 2♦ was SAYC then it is self-forcing and that makes the 2NT rebid questionable. I assume it is actually 2/1 but it is a good idea to mention this in a bidding discussion and this would also bring 3♦ in as an alternative to 3♥; better than 4♣ if nothing else.

[ArtK78]

Agree with Stewart on all counts. Responder cannot ask for aces - he has two little clubs. So just show your hearts, intending to bid diamonds next (tougher problem at matchpoints).

Opener has a great hand for diamonds once responder shows many red cards.

[neilkaz]

ArtK78, on 2014-December-30, 09:30, said:

Agree with Stewart on all counts. Opener cannot ask for aces - he has two little clubs. So just show your hearts, intending to bid diamonds next (tougher problem at matchpoints).

Opener has a great hand for diamonds once responder showns many red cards.

Of course you mean that responder cannot ask for aces with two little ♣.

Yes, the key point here is for responder to bid his hand and that once he's shown GF and all those red cards, opener has to avoid 3NTitis and love his hand for slam with 3 aces and good cards in responder's suits.

[ArtK78]

neilkaz, on 2014-December-30, 10:10, said:

Of course you mean that responder cannot ask for aces with two little ♣.

Thanks. Fixed my post.

[mikeh]

I think this was a good OP, because I suspect that the concerns raised by Trump Echo would be shared by a lot of players all the way up to and including intermediates, and posting them helps all concerned gain better insight into some pretty important bidding concepts. So at the risk of belabouring the points made above, here is my take on where the OP went wrong in his thinking:

1. a reference to a remote possibility that we hold a 4-4 heart fit. There is no remote possibility. Opener should always rebid 2♥ with 5=4 majors. Thus 3♥ by responder is not an attempt to play in hearts, but rather a forcing call providing descriptive information to partner. All too often we see posters deciding that they would rather take control of an auction than describe their hand to partner. Now, it is possible that responder has 5-6 or so in the reds, but that is a relatively rare holding, so opener should, for the moment, disregard that possibility. Even if he is 5-6, given that opener has at least 2 cards in diamonds, it probably won't matter a lot if we play in 6♦ rather than 6♥, at least at imps or rubber or total points, but I digress.

2. The notion of gerber with xx in an unbid suit is a common error made by non-expert players. There can be hands on which one can ask for Aces or keycard with no control in a suit, but only when the partnership is known to have a control, by virtue of the strength shown in the auction. Thus if opener began with a 2♣ opening bid and then showed 23-24 balanced, and we held 11 hcp, we'd be sure partner held the A or K in a suit in which we held, say, QJx...there isn't room to be missing an AK. Otherwise: one should NEVER ask for Aces or keycard when it is possible for the opps to cash an AK in a suit. Doing so is a confession that one doesn't know how to bid cooperatively. There is always an alternative...always...if one can't find it, one needs to look harder, or one shouldn't be looking for slam.

3. Once responder bids 3♥, he has shown that he is interested in a high level diamond contract. Had he held, for example, xx KQ10x AKQxx xx, he would have bid 3N over 2N, there being no realistic hope of making a slam, and no need to tell the opponents about his having hearts so well held. When opener hears the 3♥ call, his task is to look at his hand to see whether, given that he has limited and described his hand by his first two bids, he has a useful hand for a diamond slam or not. Since partner has lots of red cards, what opener wants to see, for slam purposes, is Aces in the black suits, rather than Kings, and certainly far rather than Queens and Jacks. He also would like to have something useful in the reds, bearing in mind that he can't hold cards everywhere, since he is limited in value.

Thus he sees 3 Aces!!!!!! Wow! He has virtually zero low honours in the blacks, which means that he has 'no wasted values' and that what values he holds are all 'working values' Hands with working values get upgraded while hands with wasted values get downgraded. This hand has grown up immensely.

And he has 10xx in diamonds, which is far better for slam than xx, which is a holding entirely consistent with the auction. To see how good that is, compare AKQxxx opposite both xx and xxx. Opposite xx, there is a more than 30% chance of at least 1 loser, while opposite 10xx we may be able to pick up even J9xx onside on a 4-0 break, should partner hold as little as the 8. Thus the desire to bid 3N shows a very important lack of basic principles of hand valuation.

[Trump Echo]

Thanks all for your comments. It's clearer now, thank you.

mikeh, on 2014-December-30, 10:51, said:

I think this was a good OP, because I suspect that the concerns raised by Trump Echo would be shared by a lot of players all the way up to and including intermediates, and posting them helps all concerned gain better insight into some pretty important bidding concepts. So at the risk of belabouring the points made above, here is my take on where the OP went wrong in his thinking:

1. a reference to a remote possibility that we hold a 4-4 heart fit. There is no remote possibility. Opener should always rebid 2♥ with 5=4 majors. Thus 3♥ by responder is not an attempt to play in hearts, but rather a forcing call providing descriptive information to partner. All too often we see posters deciding that they would rather take control of an auction than describe their hand to partner. Now, it is possible that responder has 5-6 or so in the reds, but that is a relatively rare holding, so opener should, for the moment, disregard that possibility. Even if he is 5-6, given that opener has at least 2 cards in diamonds, it probably won't matter a lot if we play in 6♦ rather than 6♥, at least at imps or rubber or total points, but I digress.

I understand. Thank you.

Quote

2. The notion of gerber with xx in an unbid suit is a common error made by non-expert players. There can be hands on which one can ask for Aces or keycard with no control in a suit, but only when the partnership is known to have a control, by virtue of the strength shown in the auction. Thus if opener began with a 2♣ opening bid and then showed 23-24 balanced, and we held 11 hcp, we'd be sure partner held the A or K in a suit in which we held, say, QJx...there isn't room to be missing an AK. Otherwise: one should NEVER ask for Aces or keycard when it is possible for the opps to cash an AK in a suit. Doing so is a confession that one doesn't know how to bid cooperatively. There is always an alternative...always...if one can't find it, one needs to look harder, or one shouldn't be looking for slam.

I agree it's a common error. What I am missing is considering that Clubs is an unbid suit. I wouldn't regard clubs not having been bid in this case because the 2 NT in our system promises a stop in Clubs, and therefore is just as good or better than a club bid. I understand that others may play the 2 NT rebid differently. Is it possible the ops hold AK in Clubs? Yes. But my understanding is that in a slam investigation the possibility is so remote (after partnership has either shown the suit or shown a stop) that it's worth the risk of taking the chance. Of course, if the suit was truly not bid and no stop was shown, that's a different story.

Thanks so much for your detailed responses, all.

[mikeh]

Trump Echo, on 2014-December-31, 07:16, said:

Thanks all for your comments. It's clearer now, thank you.



I understand. Thank you.



I agree it's a common error. What I am missing is considering that Clubs is an unbid suit. I wouldn't regard clubs not having been bid in this case because the 2 NT in our system promises a stop in Clubs, and therefore is just as good or better than a club bid. I understand that others may play the 2 NT rebid differently. Is it possible the ops hold AK in Clubs? Yes. But my understanding is that in a slam investigation the possibility is so remote (after partnership has either shown the suit or shown a stop) that it's worth the risk of taking the chance. Of course, if the suit was truly not bid and no stop was shown, that's a different story.

Thanks so much for your detailed responses, all.

What I should have said is a suit in which we have not yet made a cue-bid, and that is not trump. Even if 2nt showed a stopper, there is zero reason to assume such stopper includes either the A or K. This is an important point and is fundamental to learning how to avoid bad slams. Too many players think only in terms of how to reach slam. Good players think about how to stay out of bad ones, while generally bidding far more good ones than less-skilled players

[whereagles]

Regardless of how many HCP 2NT shows, I don't see why responder shouldn't bid 3♥. It's natural, it's descriptive, it's forcing.. what can be wrong with it?

[Jinksy]

I'm confused about why opener's 3♥ would show 4-6? What would he do with 4-5, and further interest in a diamond contract? Is this on the assumption that his 2♦ bid promised 5+?

[PhilKing]

Am I the only one who wants to know what Mike000 thinks?

[Fluffy]

Jinksy, on 2015-January-01, 07:35, said:

I'm confused about why opener's 3♥ would show 4-6? What would he do with 4-5, and further interest in a diamond contract? Is this on the assumption that his 2♦ bid promised 5+?

I would normally rebid 2NT with 5-4 as my partners rebid 2♠ instead of 2NT (which shows extras), but over 2NT I guess 5-4 is possible, just that it is exceptional, with extra strength and with only 2452 or 1453 as possible shapes.

[Phil]

Jinksy, on 2015-January-01, 07:35, said:

I'm confused about why opener's 3♥ would show 4-6? What would he do with 4-5, and further interest in a diamond contract? Is this on the assumption that his 2♦ bid promised 5+?

If responder had a moose and 4-5 maybe 3♥ makes some sense. But consider that responder 1) has a max of 2♠ and 2) doesn't have 4♣. Furthermore opener will never have four hearts and 3♥ uses a lot of space, so it should be fairly descriptive. Some have even suggested that with normal strength it show 5-6 but 4-6 is accepted.

[Jinksy]

Ok, is the idea that on normal hands with uncertainty about 3N I'd bid some kind of FSFish 3♣? But I thought in GF auctions, people normally liked that to be naturalish, patterning out?