[jillybean]

This is a hand from a game in NZ

---

It's not going to fit into any bidding system but what do you open?
1♠
4♠
4nt , do you play specific ACES? (corrected)
2♣ (allowed in NZ if alerted)

I'm going to add 4nt specific Aces to my card, what else could it be?

[P_Marlowe]

Vul? MP or IMP?

Most of the time I would bid 4S, and see what develops.
See the 3NT Gambling Alternatives (3NT as strong Preempt) as an valid option.

[mw64ahw]

4♦ Namyats looks fine

[mikeh]

Way too strong for namyats. Partner will almost never move and, if he does, we won’t know whether to bid 7.

Even if 2C was permitted, I’ve stated my semi tongue in cheek rule before. This is an extreme example. When you have no assurance of beating a slam bid by the opponents, you don’t have a 2C opening (I’m not counting complete freaks,,.such as a so,id 12 card suit). Here, you don’t rate to beat a grand! If they have the strength to bid it.

More seriously, opening 2C on this king of hand gets partner far too excited in terms of doubling the opps.


Me? This is potentially a good hand to take a dog for a walk. Is 1S getting passed out? No. If partner can’t bid, the opps have 25 hcp+ and at least one is short in spades.

If that’s too tame, and you have a tolerant partner, consider a pass…but do it in tempo, which may be impossible.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2026-June-06, 14:07, said:

If that’s too tame, and you have a tolerant partner, consider a pass…but do it in tempo, which may be impossible.

I passed void, Ax, x, 10 solid in tempo

4♠-P-P- I bid 6♣, made (partner had ♥K) lost 5 IMPs, it was doubled at the other table.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-June-06, 11:51, said:

This is a hand from a game in NZ

---

It's not going to fit into any bidding system but what do you open?
1♠
4♠
4nt , do you play specific Kings?
2♣ (allowed in NZ if alerted)

For most of Italy this is a no-brainer 2♣-2♦;3♠: one would have a hard time convincing them that they should have 12 HCP more that this or that they should be able to defeat any possible slam.
It's too strong for Namyats or similar and even the Gazzilli pairs would gulp at opening 1♠ here.
I'm happy to have my own version of 4NT specific Aces/Kings on the card, although I don't think I need it here.
With different partners I would be tempted to pass.

[mike777]

I don't think the opponents will remain silent, will open 1S, granted only ten HCP

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-June-06, 12:02, said:

Vul? MP or IMP?

They didn't say. If it matters, we can have multiple options

[mw64ahw]

mw64ahw, on 2026-June-06, 13:35, said:

4♦ Namyats looks fine

Rather than being too strong I thought the hand was too HCP light for 4♦. However, with 4 mod. losers/10 playing tricks as a counterweight I want to make the slam try and can't think of a cleaner way to do it.

[Huibertus]

jillybean, on 2026-June-06, 11:51, said:

This is a hand from a game in NZ

---

It's not going to fit into any bidding system but what do you open?
1♠
4♠
4nt , do you play specific ACES? (corrected)
2♣ (allowed in NZ if alerted)

I'm going to add 4nt specific Aces to my card, what else could it be?

I'm passing, it's not getting passed out. Going to incite a double if they bid, taking out everything. And who knows, partner might hold the strength and inform us much of it is in ♣.


About a decade ago I used to play two under preempts combined with strong distributional 1 or 2 suiters with 4 or less losers.

That would have allowed to tell partner you hold a ♠ 1 suiter with three losers, 2 in ♣ and 1 in ♥. That system was a tremendous burden on memory, leading to occasional mistakes where the benefits (which obviously were there) were very infrequent as these hand types are infrequent even more so when you are allowed to inform partner in uncontested auctions. We decided to stop with it.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-June-06, 11:51, said:

It's not going to fit into any bidding system but what do you open?

Having thought more about it than I would at the table, I agree it is a pig to bid.
Which is no surprise, as systems are optimized for more frequent hands.

1♠ remains the least attractive choice to me, the deals where it might work out are mostly covered by pass or 2♣ too.

Pass has its merits, not only in terms of walking the dog: imagine partner opening clubs or hearts, at least if you have the agreement that after exploring slam in Opener's suit an unexpected 6♠ is to play rather than some kind of punt for a higher slam.

Opening 2♣ might also elict 2♥ from partner, with possible positive exits as after Pass-1♥ or the less likely 1♠-2♥. If not then we rebid 3♠ imposing trumps and now we are into mixed Italian control-bidding. If partner cannot find 4♣ then we stop in 4♠+1 on a clubs lead, but if the next table is in 6♠ making on a diamonds lead after a more nebulous auction then any smugness will quickly disappear
Things get worse at 5 level on this particular hand, it would actually be better to be playing traditional bids showing an Ace and then RKCB.

Opening 4NT specific Aces is not bad, but the devil is in the detail of the agreements and the guesswork. If partner shows just ♣A then I would probably risk 6♠, with just ♥A then stop in 5♠ (if agreements allow). If the agreement is that partner shows two undefined Aces then we are in a spot: 6♠ makes with ♣+♦, with ♣+♥ it is cold and maybe worth a gamble on 7, but with ♦+♥ it goes down if they find clubs. Punting 6♠ looks the way to go.
My version of 4NT allows partner to pinpoint two Aces of same order (has to be ♣+♥) with 6♦, but leaving no space for a Kings ask. I think I would gamble 7♠, there are still three Kings out there and if not the opps might not be on the ball.