Help
Well let me present the bidding theory issues involving
a. 2/1 auction with major suit agreement at the 3 level
b. 2/1 auction with major suit agreement at the 2 level
and while I am at it I will mention as another example
c. 1M-3M(4 card limit raise)
In a and b, what are your goals?
Goals:
1. Reach the correct strain .Something like 90% of the time the correct strain is the agreed major, but roughly 10% of the time we belong in a different strain, usually NT
2. Reach the correct level
Since, you usually belong in the major, 2 is much more important than 1, but getting 2 correct is still pretty important.
What information can you share and what goals do these serve?
a. General Strength. This is mostly useful only for level. (Although, Having extra strength does increase the liklihood that 3N is better than 4M)
b. Shape. This is useful for both strain and level, since you can evaluate how well your honors are working.
c. Locations of honor cards. This is also useful for both strain and level, but for it to help strain you need to know more than 1 card in C and 1 in spades. In general, cuebidding honors does not give you enough info below 3N to help determine if 3N is correct. In general, its secondary honors (K's Q's and J's) that are potentially wasted opposite a short suit, so a high concentration of them (say KQTx) opposite a stiff is an indicater that 3N might be right.
d. control showing bids. If the control showing bids can be either length or shortness, and can be either the ace alone or a suit with honor concentration, it really does not help strain much, so this is about level.
When the suit is agreed at the 3 level, you have no chance of working out if 3N was right. When you have a fit, and the 2/1 bid showed a 5 card suit, its really rare for 3N to be right unless one player has substantial wastage opposite there partner's short suit. Hence the tools that are about level are key. That is, Strength and Location of Controls become your priority (if you had to pick between these 2, strength is much more important).
When the suit is agreed at the 2 level, you can serve both goals. Furthermore its not a choice between natural and cuebidding. Its a choice between 1 round of natural (either a shape style or an honor concentration style serves that end) and 1 round of cuebidding, vs 2 rounds of cuebidding. The natural information is as useful for slam as a second round of cuebidding (for instance showing 5431 also shows a control in the singleton suit), and since you can convey the natural info below 3N its helpful for strain as well.
I have remarked elsewhere, that cuebidding auctions convey 2 pieces of information:
a. strength
b. location of controls (or key honors in partner's suit)
and that a is much more important than b. The value you get from 2 levels of cuebidding is minimal in slam auctions. This is one of the reasons that its not that common for cuebidding auctions to extend to the 5 level. 80% of the value in cuebidding comes from the statement that someone is interested in slam. Let me ask this? Would you rather be in slam off an AK but with 12 tricks available, or in a slam where you have all suits controled but can't possibily take 12 tricks?
Since I am tierd of this post, I will only mention 1M-3M in passing. Here the 3M bidder's range is already tightly defined, so that eliminates the main value of cuebidding. Furthermore, opener is rarely good enough to bid slam on power (opposite a 10 count, openers needs to hjave opened 1M on a good 21 or so). These auctions are all about the degree of fit, since finding out if responder has a stiff is very valuable, as is the ability for opener to show a 2 suiter. Cuebidding is just not effective here.
2/1Gitleman Raising MAJOR @ 2 level
#102
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,154
- Joined: 2005-July-19
Posted 2008-January-16, 16:39
For many system shoppers it's
a good-for-nothing system
that classifies as opposites
stupidity and wisdom,
because by logic-choppers it's
accepted with avidity:
stupidity's true opposite's
the opposite stupidity.
Piet Hein
a good-for-nothing system
that classifies as opposites
stupidity and wisdom,
because by logic-choppers it's
accepted with avidity:
stupidity's true opposite's
the opposite stupidity.
Piet Hein
When Senators have had their sport
And sealed the Law by vote,
It little matters what they thought -
We hang for what they wrote.
And sealed the Law by vote,
It little matters what they thought -
We hang for what they wrote.
#103
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,363
- Joined: 2005-February-09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Zurich, Switzerland
Posted 2008-January-16, 16:52
So to argue logically for "patterning out" (which I do prefer) I'd say the following. Obviously my level of bridge expertise/experience isn't up to Fred's but:
(1) In my experience, it's not uncommon for a 5-3 major suit fit to be the "wrong strain" for slam. In order to make a slam, the 5-3 major fit has to be of very good quality. One missing trump honor can easily make the slam lousy, and it can often be right to play in a side suit (say a 6-3 minor suit fit, ruffing out the five-card major for discards) instead of in the major. Pattern bidding makes it easier to look for these possible side-suit fits, whereas a "cuebid immediately" approach potentially makes it much harder to tell.
(2) Sometimes it makes sense to rebid 2M with a doubleton honor when stuck for a call. In this case especially you need to consider alternate strains, and immediately cuebidding is not a good approach.
(3) There are many cases where the type of control makes a difference. For example, if responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥Kx, this is a nice mesh and potentially produces tricks (including perhaps a discard for a late club loser in opener's hand). If responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥x, this is of much less value since opener's hearts could potentially be discarded on the run of the clubs regardless (so ♥x not much better than ♥xxx) and ruffing in the long trumps hand doesn't particularly help our side. While a cuebidding style where you "don't show shortness controls in partner's long suit" helps a little with this, the situation exists even in the fourth suit and disambiguating can be difficult. The pattern first style locates singletons directly before starting to cuebid honor location.
(4) The ninth trump is often critical in differentiating a good slam from a bad one. For example, say we are missing the trump queen-jack and a finesse in a side suit. With nine trumps, we will make any time the queen falls (8/16) and any time trumps aren't 4-0 and the side finesse works (another 3/16) for a quite good (11/16) slam. With eight trumps, we need trumps to be 3-2 to even really have play (5/8), and then need the other finesse in addition for a quite poor (5/16) slam. A pattern-style of bidding quickly determines whether we have this ninth trump or not whereas despite the focus of Ken's cuebidding style on trump honors, it's not clear how easily we will diagnose the 9-card vs. 8-card fit.
(1) In my experience, it's not uncommon for a 5-3 major suit fit to be the "wrong strain" for slam. In order to make a slam, the 5-3 major fit has to be of very good quality. One missing trump honor can easily make the slam lousy, and it can often be right to play in a side suit (say a 6-3 minor suit fit, ruffing out the five-card major for discards) instead of in the major. Pattern bidding makes it easier to look for these possible side-suit fits, whereas a "cuebid immediately" approach potentially makes it much harder to tell.
(2) Sometimes it makes sense to rebid 2M with a doubleton honor when stuck for a call. In this case especially you need to consider alternate strains, and immediately cuebidding is not a good approach.
(3) There are many cases where the type of control makes a difference. For example, if responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥Kx, this is a nice mesh and potentially produces tricks (including perhaps a discard for a late club loser in opener's hand). If responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥x, this is of much less value since opener's hearts could potentially be discarded on the run of the clubs regardless (so ♥x not much better than ♥xxx) and ruffing in the long trumps hand doesn't particularly help our side. While a cuebidding style where you "don't show shortness controls in partner's long suit" helps a little with this, the situation exists even in the fourth suit and disambiguating can be difficult. The pattern first style locates singletons directly before starting to cuebid honor location.
(4) The ninth trump is often critical in differentiating a good slam from a bad one. For example, say we are missing the trump queen-jack and a finesse in a side suit. With nine trumps, we will make any time the queen falls (8/16) and any time trumps aren't 4-0 and the side finesse works (another 3/16) for a quite good (11/16) slam. With eight trumps, we need trumps to be 3-2 to even really have play (5/8), and then need the other finesse in addition for a quite poor (5/16) slam. A pattern-style of bidding quickly determines whether we have this ninth trump or not whereas despite the focus of Ken's cuebidding style on trump honors, it's not clear how easily we will diagnose the 9-card vs. 8-card fit.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#104
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2008-January-16, 17:50
For what it is worth...
There are a couple of misunderstandings about two-level cuebidding that seem biased by the analysis coming from a "pattern out" person. These might appropriately be cleared up to allow a better analysis of the issue being debated.
First, one concern seems to be in maintaining 3NT as a contract to consider.
Suppose a basic auction of 1♠-P-2♣-P-2♦-P-? Responder may well bid 2♠ to start a cuebidding sequence. However, there is also the option of bidding 2NT as a waiting bid, or perhaps even 4th-suit forcing. One who has concern as Responder about strain need not commit to showing fit prematurely. Thus, an election to agree spades in this sequence is not required just because you have three-card support. Further, for those who use 1♠-P-3NT as a picture bid (three-card support, flat, some control type), this also offers a "solution" to the strain concern. Consider a situation where you want patterning out to decide upon strain, in the proposed auction. Responder could bid 2NT, or occasionally 4SF, to get a "pattern bid" from Opener.
Second, there is a feeling that you cannot exchange all that much more information with one morem level of cuebidding. This cracks me up, when I consider how effective cuebidding sequences are with two-level cuebidding, as opposed to without.
Take a simple example of 1♠-P-2♥-P-3♥. First of all, no one can cuebid trumps. We cannot find out about trump quality unless we bypass game.
In the example earlier, lots of information can be exchanged about trumps.
1. Because 2NT denies two of the top three trumps, whoever first can bypass 2NT can promise good trumps (two top ones). If one person does show two top trumps, either partner could confirm that all three are held, or Opener might clarify only having two top trumps and not three, or Responder might clarify not having the third top trump. These sequences often make RKCB meaningless as far as the "King and Queen of trumps." This allows the "asker" to often switch the "lesser controls focus" to another suit. Thus, after a spade agreement, Responder might already know about the King and Queen of trumps and elect to ask "RKCB" in clubs (5♣) to find out immediately (not committing to slam yet) about the King and Queen of clubs. That comes up a lot.
2. Bidding 2NT to deny good trumps can often be clarified later as "just one" or "no top trumps" by later cuebidding or not cuebidding three of the major, with equal impact. Or, the other partner might later show two top trumps himself.
Also, a lot of information about side suit holdings can be exchanged.
1. If you cue partner's suit at the three-level and then at the four-level, you can show two of his missing three top trumps, solidifying a broken suit for him. You can also fail to cue your own suit, or twice cue your own suit to show how solid or not solid it is.
2. If you deny any A/K/Q in partner's suit at the three-level, you can cuebid shortness in partner's suit at the four-level. That ability is not all that frequent.
In the "fourth suit" situation, you also can often clarify below game whether your control is first-round or second-round, both cue the suit to show double control, and the like.
Inferences from failures to cue, or from cueing despite a failure to cue, are more reliable if made without spadce crunch concerns.
Of course, there's more. However, I find it humorous, as always, how inept a person of a different perspective can be in articulating the alternative theory. If you do not know that alternative theory and just guess, incorrectly, then you have a high risk of getting things wrong.
There are a couple of misunderstandings about two-level cuebidding that seem biased by the analysis coming from a "pattern out" person. These might appropriately be cleared up to allow a better analysis of the issue being debated.
First, one concern seems to be in maintaining 3NT as a contract to consider.
Suppose a basic auction of 1♠-P-2♣-P-2♦-P-? Responder may well bid 2♠ to start a cuebidding sequence. However, there is also the option of bidding 2NT as a waiting bid, or perhaps even 4th-suit forcing. One who has concern as Responder about strain need not commit to showing fit prematurely. Thus, an election to agree spades in this sequence is not required just because you have three-card support. Further, for those who use 1♠-P-3NT as a picture bid (three-card support, flat, some control type), this also offers a "solution" to the strain concern. Consider a situation where you want patterning out to decide upon strain, in the proposed auction. Responder could bid 2NT, or occasionally 4SF, to get a "pattern bid" from Opener.
Second, there is a feeling that you cannot exchange all that much more information with one morem level of cuebidding. This cracks me up, when I consider how effective cuebidding sequences are with two-level cuebidding, as opposed to without.
Take a simple example of 1♠-P-2♥-P-3♥. First of all, no one can cuebid trumps. We cannot find out about trump quality unless we bypass game.
In the example earlier, lots of information can be exchanged about trumps.
1. Because 2NT denies two of the top three trumps, whoever first can bypass 2NT can promise good trumps (two top ones). If one person does show two top trumps, either partner could confirm that all three are held, or Opener might clarify only having two top trumps and not three, or Responder might clarify not having the third top trump. These sequences often make RKCB meaningless as far as the "King and Queen of trumps." This allows the "asker" to often switch the "lesser controls focus" to another suit. Thus, after a spade agreement, Responder might already know about the King and Queen of trumps and elect to ask "RKCB" in clubs (5♣) to find out immediately (not committing to slam yet) about the King and Queen of clubs. That comes up a lot.
2. Bidding 2NT to deny good trumps can often be clarified later as "just one" or "no top trumps" by later cuebidding or not cuebidding three of the major, with equal impact. Or, the other partner might later show two top trumps himself.
Also, a lot of information about side suit holdings can be exchanged.
1. If you cue partner's suit at the three-level and then at the four-level, you can show two of his missing three top trumps, solidifying a broken suit for him. You can also fail to cue your own suit, or twice cue your own suit to show how solid or not solid it is.
2. If you deny any A/K/Q in partner's suit at the three-level, you can cuebid shortness in partner's suit at the four-level. That ability is not all that frequent.
In the "fourth suit" situation, you also can often clarify below game whether your control is first-round or second-round, both cue the suit to show double control, and the like.
Inferences from failures to cue, or from cueing despite a failure to cue, are more reliable if made without spadce crunch concerns.
Of course, there's more. However, I find it humorous, as always, how inept a person of a different perspective can be in articulating the alternative theory. If you do not know that alternative theory and just guess, incorrectly, then you have a high risk of getting things wrong.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#105
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2008-January-16, 18:01
(1) In my experience, it's not uncommon for a 5-3 major suit fit to be the "wrong strain" for slam. In order to make a slam, the 5-3 major fit has to be of very good quality. One missing trump honor can easily make the slam lousy, and it can often be right to play in a side suit (say a 6-3 minor suit fit, ruffing out the five-card major for discards) instead of in the major. Pattern bidding makes it easier to look for these possible side-suit fits, whereas a "cuebid immediately" approach potentially makes it much harder to tell.
Your predisposition to pattern bidding is misleading you in this. Immediate cues make finding the solidity of the second-suit fit below game easier, and we also find out about the poor trumps below game. Thus, after a spade agreement at the two-level, I often know that the combined spades are lousy below 4♠. I also often already know that my side club suit is solid when added to partner's (two?) club honors, or I can bid 5♣ as RKCB for clubs.
(2) Sometimes it makes sense to rebid 2M with a doubleton honor when stuck for a call. In this case especially you need to consider alternate strains, and immediately cuebidding is not a good approach.
This has been debated, and there are valid points on each side. If you do not use this approach, then this is not even a concern. I would even fail to immediately support the major with three-card support on occasion.
(3) There are many cases where the type of control makes a difference. For example, if responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥Kx, this is a nice mesh and potentially produces tricks (including perhaps a discard for a late club loser in opener's hand). If responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥x, this is of much less value since opener's hearts could potentially be discarded on the run of the clubs regardless (so ♥x not much better than ♥xxx) and ruffing in the long trumps hand doesn't particularly help our side. While a cuebidding style where you "don't show shortness controls in partner's long suit" helps a little with this, the situation exists even in the fourth suit and disambiguating can be difficult. The pattern first style locates singletons directly before starting to cuebid honor location.
In contrast, two-level cues sometimes allow shortness cues in partner's suit, allow supportive cues in partner's suit with a stiff honor or tight honors, and the like. Occasionally a problem like this might arise in a side suit, but usually only in Opener's side suit of clubs, or a side suit of hearts, because a person with AQx in a minor tends to bid that if possible. But, I'll concede that this can be an occasional ambiguity.
(4) The ninth trump is often critical in differentiating a good slam from a bad one. For example, say we are missing the trump queen-jack and a finesse in a side suit. With nine trumps, we will make any time the queen falls (8/16) and any time trumps aren't 4-0 and the side finesse works (another 3/16) for a quite good (11/16) slam. With eight trumps, we need trumps to be 3-2 to even really have play (5/8), and then need the other finesse in addition for a quite poor (5/16) slam. A pattern-style of bidding quickly determines whether we have this ninth trump or not whereas despite the focus of Ken's cuebidding style on trump honors, it's not clear how easily we will diagnose the 9-card vs. 8-card fit.
Jacoby 2NT solves some of those problems. But, this does occur. That said, I'm not sure that I'd rather enter the five-level with knowledge that we have a nine-fit that could be xxxxx opposite xxxx, or with knowledge of precisely how many of the top three honors we have in an 8-card or longer fit.
Your predisposition to pattern bidding is misleading you in this. Immediate cues make finding the solidity of the second-suit fit below game easier, and we also find out about the poor trumps below game. Thus, after a spade agreement at the two-level, I often know that the combined spades are lousy below 4♠. I also often already know that my side club suit is solid when added to partner's (two?) club honors, or I can bid 5♣ as RKCB for clubs.
(2) Sometimes it makes sense to rebid 2M with a doubleton honor when stuck for a call. In this case especially you need to consider alternate strains, and immediately cuebidding is not a good approach.
This has been debated, and there are valid points on each side. If you do not use this approach, then this is not even a concern. I would even fail to immediately support the major with three-card support on occasion.
(3) There are many cases where the type of control makes a difference. For example, if responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥Kx, this is a nice mesh and potentially produces tricks (including perhaps a discard for a late club loser in opener's hand). If responder holds ♥AQx and opener holds ♥x, this is of much less value since opener's hearts could potentially be discarded on the run of the clubs regardless (so ♥x not much better than ♥xxx) and ruffing in the long trumps hand doesn't particularly help our side. While a cuebidding style where you "don't show shortness controls in partner's long suit" helps a little with this, the situation exists even in the fourth suit and disambiguating can be difficult. The pattern first style locates singletons directly before starting to cuebid honor location.
In contrast, two-level cues sometimes allow shortness cues in partner's suit, allow supportive cues in partner's suit with a stiff honor or tight honors, and the like. Occasionally a problem like this might arise in a side suit, but usually only in Opener's side suit of clubs, or a side suit of hearts, because a person with AQx in a minor tends to bid that if possible. But, I'll concede that this can be an occasional ambiguity.
(4) The ninth trump is often critical in differentiating a good slam from a bad one. For example, say we are missing the trump queen-jack and a finesse in a side suit. With nine trumps, we will make any time the queen falls (8/16) and any time trumps aren't 4-0 and the side finesse works (another 3/16) for a quite good (11/16) slam. With eight trumps, we need trumps to be 3-2 to even really have play (5/8), and then need the other finesse in addition for a quite poor (5/16) slam. A pattern-style of bidding quickly determines whether we have this ninth trump or not whereas despite the focus of Ken's cuebidding style on trump honors, it's not clear how easily we will diagnose the 9-card vs. 8-card fit.
Jacoby 2NT solves some of those problems. But, this does occur. That said, I'm not sure that I'd rather enter the five-level with knowledge that we have a nine-fit that could be xxxxx opposite xxxx, or with knowledge of precisely how many of the top three honors we have in an 8-card or longer fit.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#106
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,637
- Joined: 2003-May-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Ottawa, Canada
- Interests:Military history, WW II wargames
Posted 2008-January-20, 09:12
WrecksVee, on Jan 12 2008, 06:30 AM, said:
As to pattern showing or cue bidding after 1♠-2♣-2♥-2♠ I decided to see what I could find in bridge literature.
Bridge World Standard did not address this as far as my quick scan could determine.
Kokish and Kraft's "Modern American Bidding" falls in the pattern camp. But the suggested method is conventional. Opener rebids either third suit at the three level to show shortness. Rebids of 2NT, 3♥,3♠ and 4♠ were reserved for =5=4=2=2 with specific definitions.
Steve Robinson's "Washington Standard" 2nd ed. uses cue bidding.
Anyone else have any books that have a view on this?
Bridge World Standard did not address this as far as my quick scan could determine.
Kokish and Kraft's "Modern American Bidding" falls in the pattern camp. But the suggested method is conventional. Opener rebids either third suit at the three level to show shortness. Rebids of 2NT, 3♥,3♠ and 4♠ were reserved for =5=4=2=2 with specific definitions.
Steve Robinson's "Washington Standard" 2nd ed. uses cue bidding.
Anyone else have any books that have a view on this?
Lawrence in the January 08 ACBL Bulletin (page 54) gives this hand:
On the auction 1♥-2♣-2♦-2♥, opener rebids 4♥ as "does not have much interest in anything higher. 4♥ is not a strong bid."
He says 1♥-2♣-2♦-3♥ is "16 (or so) points with specific values which include three (rarely four) excellent trumps and a good suit (in this case diamonds), and shows slam interest." Yes, he did say "in this case diamonds" even though responder had bid 2♣ - he likely meant clubs, as his typical hand is:
He says 1♥-2♣-2♦-4♥ is "game values and three (rarely four) trumps, but no controls in either of the unbid suits" (yes, there is only one unbid suit at this point, so he must mean unbid suits by responder)
'I hit my peak at seven' Taylor Swift
#107
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 536
- Joined: 2003-May-28
- Location:Saltlake City
Posted 2008-January-21, 15:19
DFGBUFF, on Jan 9 2008, 04:26 PM, said:
In BBO, Mr. GITLEMAN, has written a few articles on IMPROVIMG YOUR 2/1. he had mentioned that he would write another article, about when your MAJOR IS raised on the 2nd level, after a 2/1.......ex....1S---2C,,,,,2H----2S................What should occur NOW? We have been using our next bid to be 3S, then start SERIOUS 3NT........................IS THERE ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE...?
In principle, the third round bid should show some shape information.
2N: NT can be a spot.
3C: 3 clubs or more clubs, natural.
3D: no other choices available, usually designed for 5-4-2-2 shape without D stopper,
sometimes can be 5-4-3-1 shape, without D stopper and that singleton club is an honor.
3H: 5 hearts.
3S: 6 spades.
4C: splinter.
4D: splinter.
The key here is to take advantage of the low bidding level and define one's hand as
accurate as possible. The draw back is that when nobody has extra, the bidding just
discloses too much distributional information. That's actually why I like 1M 2x 2x+1 to show minimum, so bidding can often end very fast: 1S 2C 2D 4S pass, and opps can still
be in dark.
#108
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 536
- Joined: 2003-May-28
- Location:Saltlake City
Posted 2008-January-21, 15:55
kenrexford, on Jan 15 2008, 11:19 PM, said:
Well, that objection might work for this deal.
Tweak 'er slightly.
♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣KQ
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AJxxx
Tweak 'er slightly.
♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣KQ
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AJxxx
This slam is biddable, in regular treatment with nonserious 3NT:
1S 2C
2D 2S
3H(no other choices available) 3N(mild slam interest, as a reverse to serious 3NT)
4C(cuebid, honor) 4H(cuebid)
5D(cuebid, not strong enough to rkc, but still have the right value for 5 level after partner's show of mild slam interest) 5H(last train, with CJ and good trumps, gotta make the last train slam invitation)
6S(CQ can have good value, so take the push)
#109
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 16,739
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2008-January-21, 16:44
junyi_zhu, on Jan 21 2008, 04:55 PM, said:
kenrexford, on Jan 15 2008, 11:19 PM, said:
Well, that objection might work for this deal.
Tweak 'er slightly.
♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣KQ
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AJxxx
Tweak 'er slightly.
♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣KQ
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AJxxx
This slam is biddable, in regular treatment with nonserious 3NT:
1S 2C
2D 2S
3H(no other choices available) 3N(mild slam interest, as a reverse to serious 3NT)
4C(cuebid, honor) 4H(cuebid)
5D(cuebid, not strong enough to rkc, but still have the right value for 5 level after partner's show of mild slam interest) 5H(last train, with CJ and good trumps, gotta make the last train slam invitation)
6S(CQ can have good value, so take the push)
Great now we got a 3h rebid which seems to be neither shape bidding nor cuebidding.....geez talk about confusing.
Up to this point the whole thread was about those two issues. Now I am even more confused.
#110
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 536
- Joined: 2003-May-28
- Location:Saltlake City
Posted 2008-January-21, 17:24
mike777, on Jan 21 2008, 10:44 PM, said:
junyi_zhu, on Jan 21 2008, 04:55 PM, said:
kenrexford, on Jan 15 2008, 11:19 PM, said:
Well, that objection might work for this deal.
Tweak 'er slightly.
♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣KQ
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AJxxx
Tweak 'er slightly.
♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣KQ
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣AJxxx
This slam is biddable, in regular treatment with nonserious 3NT:
1S 2C
2D 2S
3H(no other choices available) 3N(mild slam interest, as a reverse to serious 3NT)
4C(cuebid, honor) 4H(cuebid)
5D(cuebid, not strong enough to rkc, but still have the right value for 5 level after partner's show of mild slam interest) 5H(last train, with CJ and good trumps, gotta make the last train slam invitation)
6S(CQ can have good value, so take the push)
Great now we got a 3h rebid which seems to be neither shape bidding nor cuebidding.....geez talk about confusing.
Up to this point the whole thread was about those two issues. Now I am even more confused.
you can take 3H as a shape showing bid, which shows either 5-2-4-2 no H stopper,
or 5-3-4-1, no H stopper. If one wants accurate shape and stopper information by bidding 2NT or 3 C/D/S, one gotta have 3H reserved for a none of above bid, which is certainly better than a lie of the shape.