[jillybean]

---

[TMorris]

4H for me. A bit strong perhaps but not that much really.

[Cyberyeti]

 TMorris, on 2021-March-17, 05:43, said:

4H for me. A bit strong perhaps but not that much really.

Well is partner expected to bid on with AKx, Kxx, Axx, Axxx ? easy 13 tricks most of the time.

Presuming partner is showing 18-19 balanced, I think there is too much chance of slam to be that pessimistic, how I investigate depends on my methods.

We would likely have this easier, 1♣-1♥-1N(15-bad 19)-2♣(art enq)-3?(17-bad 19 natural ish reply GF), if partner bids 3m we can bid 3♥ and see what partner does, if they bid 3♠ we know they have only 2 hearts.

[hrothgar]

 TMorris, on 2021-March-17, 05:43, said:

4H for me. A bit strong perhaps but not that much really.

3♦

I'll correct 3N or 4♠ to 4♥
I'll cue 4♣ over 3♥

[AL78]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-17, 06:05, said:

Well is partner expected to bid on with AKx, Kxx, Axx, Axxx ? easy 13 tricks most of the time.

Presuming partner is showing 18-19 balanced, I think there is too much chance of slam to be that pessimistic, how I investigate depends on my methods.

We would likely have this easier, 1♣-1♥-1N(15-bad 19)-2♣(art enq)-3?(17-bad 19 natural ish reply GF), if partner bids 3m we can bid 3♥ and see what partner does, if they bid 3♠ we know they have only 2 hearts.

That is a very precise hand partner could have, pretty much the perfect hand with all the key controls and tricks in the right places. If partner did hold that hand, aren't they worth a slam nudge themselves?

[Cyberyeti]

 AL78, on 2021-March-17, 07:36, said:

That is a very precise hand partner could have, pretty much the perfect hand with all the key controls and tricks in the right places. If partner did hold that hand, aren't they worth a slam nudge themselves?

Not really, it's how you'd bid a 4 count with 7 hearts, there are lots of hands rich in controls where 6 is easy, I picked that one because it made 7. Ax, xxx, Axx, AQJxx will make 6 most of the time and you should be a king better than that.

[Winstonm]

I think 3h followed by 4h over a presumed 3nt fairly well describes the possibilities of this hand. If 3h is raised to 4h I would make one try with 5c

[Cyberyeti]

 Winstonm, on 2021-March-17, 08:14, said:

I think 3h followed by 4h over a presumed 3nt fairly well describes the possibilities of this hand. If 3h is raised to 4h I would make one try with 5c

You need to be clear 3♥ is forcing, I suppose it helps if an initial 2♥ was weak, otherwise what do you expect to happen with say:

xxxx, KJ10xxx, xx, x, you bid over 1♣ hoping to play a low level major suit contract rather than 1♣ in a 4-1 fit (or 2-1 if you play that sort of club) and now you want to get out as fast as possible.

[Winstonm]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-17, 08:32, said:

You need to be clear 3♥ is forcing, I suppose it helps if an initial 2♥ was weak, otherwise what do you expect to happen with say:

xxxx, KJ10xxx, xx, x, you bid over 1♣ hoping to play a low level major suit contract rather than 1♣ in a 4-1 fit (or 2-1 if you play that sort of club) and now you want to get out as fast as possible.

Yes, system is critical. Wolff sign-off is what I used with weak hands in this sequence. Without discussion, though, I would assume a suit rebid over 2NT to be a positive move. But then everyone I ever played with or against had a specialized sequence to show single-suited weakness, mostly WJS. Maybe that was a U.S.A. thing.

[Cyberyeti]

 Winstonm, on 2021-March-17, 09:39, said:

Yes, system is critical. Wolff sign-off is what I used with weak hands in this sequence. Without discussion, though, I would assume a suit rebid over 2NT to be a positive move. But then everyone I ever played with or against had a specialized sequence to show single-suited weakness, mostly WJS. Maybe that was a U.S.A. thing.

WJS I think is more common with a short club, I've played them exactly once in my life when I had to play a scratch partnership in an important KO match when my partner was trapped abroad by the Icelandic volcano ash cloud.

[LBengtsson]

it is good to have here when partner bids 2nt 18-19 bal. a forcing 3♣ bid as checkback by responder. I have seen a few pairs use this method.

[jillybean]

---

You can use 3♦ checkback. If you do, partner bids 3♥
Following Richard's 4♣ cue, partner cooperates with a ♦ cue.

[Cyberyeti]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-17, 13:22, said:

---

You can use 3♦ checkback. If you do, partner bids 3♥
Following Richard's 4♣ cue, partner cooperates with a ♦ cue.

4♥ suggests no spade control (or would 3♠ have been control rather than suit ? - in which case 4♦ shows a spade control also) so I bid that.

[mikeh]

Methods help

I think the most common approach amongst experts not playing a big club method (where this sequence, with opener having a big hand, doesn't exist) is to play transfers by responder. They do require a little discussion and some memory work, but the experts I have persuaded to play this, rather than Wolff, agree that it is superior.

Here, it is easy: bid 3D, which forces 3H (since you may be passing, having responded on xxx KJxxxx xxx x or the like), over which 4H is a mild slam try....with no slam interest, you would bid 4H over 2N

If not playing transfers, or Wolff, then it comes down to agreements. I would far rather play 3H as forcing than as signoff, on a cost-benefit analysis, and even at mps, on a frequency basis. If not doing that, or not sure that partner will take it as forcing, I use new minor, if available, even tho it is theoretically unsound, and then if partner owns to 3H, I will cue 4C and then bid (or pass) 4H. If I play nothing, and don't trust partner, I bid 4H and hope the hands don't mesh well.

Btw, for transfers, which apply after 1x 1y 2N, where x and y are suits (no matter what the suits are)

Over 2N

If responder transfers to his own suit, this is mandatory...opener ALWAYS accepts. See above for why: responder may be dying to get out

If responder transfers to diamonds, this is mandatory...responder may be about to pass (say 1C 1S 2N....responder has Qxxx xx Kxxxx xx, playing a walsh style)

A common situation, which needs clear agreement and memory, is when responder has bid 1M over 1m

a) responder has bid 1S

1m 1S
2N....

if responder has 4+ hearts, he has longer or equal (5+) spades

3D shows 4+ hearts. Opener bids 3H with 4, 3S with 3 spades and fewer than 4 hearts, and 3N with 2=2 or 2=3 majors

With 5+ spades and no interest in hearts, responder bids 3H, a mandatory transfer to 3S. Over this, 3N is a choice of games, 4x, below 4S, a cuebid, and 4S a mild slam try (no jump to 4S over 2N)

If responder has bid 1H, he may be 4-4 majors, or 5+ hearts and 4+ spades

Over 2N, with 4-4, bid 3H, transfer to spades, which opener accepts only with 4 spades, bidding 3N otherwise

With 4=5+, transfer to hearts, then bid 3S

With slam interest in clubs, after 1x 1y 2N, bid 3S...opener looks at his hand, in the context of his bidding so far, and bids 3N with a poor hand for a club contract and 4C with a good hand

There are a lot of extra things one can do with this approach, but what I have set out here will, by itself, be a big improvement on wolff or new minor

[jillybean]

---

Now it is easy having seen all hands.
Once partner makes a mild slam try over 2nt, I think I would go on after 4♥ but perhaps signoff after the kickback response knowing we are missing an ace and possibly ♥Q, & not knowing partner has 7 trump.
Seeing all hands I can bid 6nt and protect my ♦K.

Needless to say, it didn't go like this at the table. Partner bid 4♥/2nt.

[Cyberyeti]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-17, 16:19, said:

---

Now it is easy having seen all hands.
Once partner makes a mild slam try over 2nt, I think I would go on after 4♥ but perhaps signoff after the kickback response knowing we are missing an ace and possibly ♥Q, & not knowing partner has 7 trump.
Seeing all hands I can bid 6nt and protect my ♦K.

Needless to say, it didn't go like this at the table. Partner bid 4♥/2nt.

If they lead a heart or a club, you only have 11 tricks in NT.

You don't sign off because after your 3♥ bid showing 3, partner shows the Q because of the known 10 card fit.

[jillybean]

---

[jillybean]

 Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-17, 16:25, said:

You don't sign off because after your 3♥ bid showing 3, partner shows the Q because of the known 10 card fit.

Do you think that's going to happen here?
I will sign off, partner doesn't get to show "10 card fit Queen" in the Keycard response. They may go on and bid 6 after I signoff.

[mikeh]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-17, 16:19, said:

---

Now it is easy having seen all hands.
Once partner makes a mild slam try over 2nt, I think I would go on after 4♥ but perhaps signoff after the kickback response knowing we are missing an ace and possibly ♥Q, & not knowing partner has 7 trump.
Seeing all hands I can bid 6nt and protect my ♦K.

Needless to say, it didn't go like this at the table. Partner bid 4♥/2nt.

The balanced hand should almost never ask for keycards, for the simple reason that, if responder has not been able to describe shape precisely, opener can’t count winners. Keycard will help count losers, but not winners.

Having said that, knowing that opener is cooperating with a mild slam try, it’s reasonable (but not bulletproof-proof) for responder to ‘show the Queen’ if asked. This is common when holding undisclosed length. Note that if opener has the Queen, he now knows partner has at least 7 hearts.

In my partnerships, the auction is very different because we play transfer responses to 1C, and opener would reject the transfer to bid 1N, showing 17-19.

In one partnership we play transfers then, and in the other xyz. Both get 2D leading to 2H by opener, and off to the right-sided 6H we go.

But with non-regular partners, still using transfers over the jump to 2N:

2N 3D
3H 4H
4N 5C
5D 6H

4N a spade cuebid, not keycard

If opener decided to keycard:

4H 4S
4N 5C
6C

North shows the heart Queen and club king.

JB, signing off once partner shows a keycard is extremely pessimistic. If you’re not willing to ask for the trump Queen, once you know you have 4 keycards, you really shouldn’t use keycard.

[Cyberyeti]

 jillybean, on 2021-March-17, 16:41, said:

Do you think that's going to happen here?
I will sign off, partner doesn't get to show "10 card fit Queen" in the Keycard response. They may go on and bid 6 after I signoff.

Surely you at least ask for the Q, you thoroughly deserve the same dummy +♦Q if you don't, and partner can't bid on themself because you'll have AKJx, xxx, KJ, AQJx as you slammed the brakes on because you were missing 2 keys.