[manudude03]

Scoring: MP

Our auction:
1♠-2♣
2♥-3♦ (i)
3♠-3NT

(i) 4th suit forcing

---

Had this hand tonight at the club, one pair got to 6S, the others (apart from us)were in 4S everyone making all 13 (laydown)

[ArtK78]

Here is a very easy way to bid the GRAND:

1♠ - 2♣
3♠ - 4♠
4NT - 5♣ or 5♦ (whichever response that shows 1 or 4 key cards)
5♠* - 5NT**
7NT

*Assume partner has one key card (but obviously hoping he has 4)
**4 key cards but no trump queen.

There is a slight risk that you will get to the 5 level off three or four aces on this auction if partner's 2♣ response consists of less than 2 aces, but c'est la vie.

[kenrexford]

1♠-2♣*
2♥**-2NT***
3♠-4♣(cue in support of spades
4NT-all
7NT.

*could be short
**if possible, rebid under 2♠
***3♦ was bizarre (unless standard -- forgot that possibility)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

your auction is fine until 3NT, some would hide the 4 card
heart suit and bid 3S instead of 2H, but 2H is ok.
Over 3NT you should bid 3S, sry ... prefering to play 3 NT at
MP is all fine, but passing 3NT is simply ... (sick would put
too mildly).
The nice thing is 4S should now show 7-4, and partner can and
certainly will march on.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[TimG]

Opener has bid spades-hearts-spades (which normally shows more strength than Spades-spades-hearts) with an aceless hand. It strikes me as a pretty good bet that opener has some playing tricks. If responder bids keycard over 3S and confirms all keycards, opener should have an easy time bidding the grand.

[jdonn]

This would be very easy in 2/1 on any auction, probably starting either

1♠ 2♣
2♥ 2NT
3♠ cuebid

or

1♠ 2♣
2♠ 2NT
3♥ 3♠ (or 3♠ directly over 2♠)
cuebid

Anyway I really think opener should rebid spades right away and not bid hearts, but there is no great solution to a hand like this in the given methods.

[EricK]

TimG, on May 19 2008, 11:53 PM, said:

Opener has bid spades-hearts-spades (which normally shows more strength than Spades-spades-hearts) with an aceless hand. It strikes me as a pretty good bet that opener has some playing tricks. If responder bids keycard over 3S and confirms all keycards, opener should have an easy time bidding the grand.

Is this so in response to FSF? How would opener bid KQJxx QJxx Jx Kx?

[P_Marlowe]

EricK, on May 20 2008, 12:48 AM, said:

TimG, on May 19 2008, 11:53 PM, said:

Opener has bid spades-hearts-spades (which normally shows more strength than Spades-spades-hearts) with an aceless hand.  It strikes me as a pretty good bet that opener has some playing tricks.  If responder bids keycard over 3S and confirms all keycards, opener should have an easy time bidding the grand.

Is this so in response to FSF? How would opener bid KQJxx QJxx Jx Kx?

yes, ... thats why my claim that a 4S bid after 3NT would
show 7-4 is wrong.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Flame]

Passing 3NT with such a hand is a big mistake mp or imp. The main problem with it isnt missing a grand but going down in 3N when 4S make overtricks.

[ASkolnick]

Your partner is a distributional 6-4 and you hold all the aces, you take a bid besides 3N.

With your cards, worst case is he has 1 minor suit loser and possibly 1 major suit loser and that is if you opened with complete drech.

[manudude03]

Then what's you bid after FSF with the hand EricK posted (KQJxx QJxx Jx Kx)? 3D didn't promise a stopper. I posted the hands the wrong way round so changed the dealer to fix that (I was North, but actually held the South cards).

I should have said (didn't think it would matter here) that we were playing basic acol with weak nt and 4cM (and 3 weak 2s). The whole point behind the 3D then 3NT was to try and say I have a hand that's too good just to sign off, but not sure if we have slam and where if we do. If I heard a 3H response, I would have jumped to 6H. We both agreed (and as what seems to be suggested here too) that we need to find a way of getting the distributional hand to do the asking.

A little while after I posted this, I also realised that its easy playing namyats (unfortunately I don't with this partner)

[dcvetkov]

I agree with jdonn sequences. The worst bid, however is 3NT IMO. 4 aces, opposite 6-4 opener simply is too pessimistic, and even can go down when we can not cash enough tricks. This is clear will be a suit contract, so South owe partner a 4club cue, or even 4s will do. North will be the one using old Black, and can count 13 tricks

[NickRW]

manudude03, on May 20 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

I should have said (didn't think it would matter here) that we were playing basic acol with weak nt and 4cM (and 3 weak 2s).

Well, I think the sequence you adopted was reasonable given the system you're playing and the scoring method, but, as North, I am not sitting for 3N with a 7411 shape and especially with no guarantee that the spades are running. I'd be bidding 4♠. And then the penny should drop for South.

Actually I've set this hand up on a board for my kids to bid this evening - we play our own Acol variant - different two bids to you - but that won't affect things here - maybe I'll post what they actually bid later - sure hope they've got the gumption to find 6♠ at the very least.

Nick

[ArtK78]

manudude03, on May 20 2008, 11:00 AM, said:

If I heard a 3H response, I would have jumped to 6H.

I was wondering if anyone was going to suggest playing in a 4-4 heart slam on these cards.

I submit to you that playing in a 4-4 heart fit could lead to a disaster on this hand. About the only time it is conceivable that hearts will play better than spades is if responder is void in spades and has solid (A987) trump. If you are off diamond cards and hearts break 4-1, it is quite possible that the dummy can be tapped by two rounds of diamonds and the spade suit can be lost. If partner has Ax of spades, all is likely to be well. But in that case 6♠ would have been just as easy. But the converse is not true. 6♠ is likely to make almost any time that 6♥ makes.

There are extreme hands on which hearts will play better than spades. Most of those require responder to be void in spades. A 5 card heart holding would be a good start, as well. But on most hands where there is a 4-4 heart fit, spades will play at least as well if not better than hearts. And partner did respond 2♣, so the odds of his having a 5 card heart suit are pretty small.

That is one of the reasons I chose to rebid 3♠ over partner's 2♣ response - I consider this hand to be a one-suiter, not a two-suiter.

[EricK]

I think 3♠ is a mistake. 4♠ in response to FSF should show a hand like this . i.e. self supporting spades (good 7 or very good 6), and good 4 card hearts (else they wouldn't be mentioned in the first place). Bidding the grand is still difficult though, but certainly responder should drive to 6 with all his controls

[ArtK78]

EricK, on May 20 2008, 12:37 PM, said:

I think 3♠ is a mistake. 4♠ in response to FSF should show a hand like this . i.e. self supporting spades (good 7 or very good 6), and good 4 card hearts (else they wouldn't be mentioned in the first place). Bidding the grand is still difficult though, but certainly responder should drive to 6 with all his controls

Responder has aces and spaces. He has a hand worth 4 tricks - no more, no less. He may be able to tell from opener's bidding that a small slam is worthwhile, but even that is no easy task.

Opener, on the other hand, knows that the limit of the hand depends on one thing and one thing only - the number of aces his partner holds. Quite frankly, it is not unreasonable for opener to open 2♣ if the partnership is playing control responses. If the response is less than 6 controls, opener signs off in 4♠. If the response is 6 controls or more, opener needs to set trump and then ask for aces (assuming the partnership permits an ace asking bid after a control showing response) or use whatever other method the partnership has to determine what the controls consist of.

After a 1♠ opening bid and hearing a 2♣ response, I believe it is the practical course for opener to take the bull by the horns - set trumps and ask for aces. Even if opener gets a 1 ace response, all is not necessarily lost - responder must have a minor suit headed by an AK for his 2/1 response. If the defense does not take its minor suit ace, it will go away. But if the response to 4NT is 2, 3 or 4 aces, opener knows where to place the contract with certainty.

[NickRW]

NickRW, on May 20 2008, 04:41 PM, said:

manudude03, on May 20 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

I should have said (didn't think it would matter here) that we were playing basic acol with weak nt and 4cM (and 3 weak 2s).

...
Actually I've set this hand up on a board for my kids to bid this evening - we play our own Acol variant - different two bids to you - but that won't affect things here - maybe I'll post what they actually bid later - sure hope they've got the gumption to find 6♠ at the very least.

Well, um, not very educational, but they actually went

1S-3N (awful!)
4H-.... tanks ....6S

So they kind of found one of the slams - but I didn't approve

Nick

[P_Marlowe]

NickRW, on May 20 2008, 04:15 PM, said:

NickRW, on May 20 2008, 04:41 PM, said:

manudude03, on May 20 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

I should have said (didn't think it would matter here) that we were playing basic acol with weak nt and 4cM (and 3 weak 2s).

...
Actually I've set this hand up on a board for my kids to bid this evening - we play our own Acol variant - different two bids to you - but that won't affect things here - maybe I'll post what they actually bid later - sure hope they've got the gumption to find 6♠ at the very least.

Well, um, not very educational, but they actually went

1S-3N (awful!)
4H-.... tanks ....6S

So they kind of found one of the slams - but I didn't approve

Nick

Well I dont think 3NT is awful, ... 3 NT should show something like
13-15 bal., denying primary support for partner.
You are not too far away from what you actually hold, it is an
underbid, but a practical bid ... I think 4H is a lot more problematic,
and 6S as well.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

ArtK78, on May 20 2008, 01:55 PM, said:

EricK, on May 20 2008, 12:37 PM, said:

I think 3♠ is a mistake. 4♠ in response to FSF should show a hand like this . i.e. self supporting spades (good 7 or very good 6), and good 4 card hearts (else they wouldn't be mentioned in the first place). Bidding the grand is still difficult though, but certainly responder should drive to 6 with all his controls

Responder has aces and spaces. He has a hand worth 4 tricks - no more, no less. He may be able to tell from opener's bidding that a small slam is worthwhile, but even that is no easy task.

<snip>

Aces and spaces.

I wonder were this comes from.

He holds Aces.
An Ace is a great card, he has 4 great cards, which will
be helpfull for partner, no matter how his hands looks
like.
How often do you hold 4 cards which will be really helpful
for partner, ... besides having a fit for partner.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[ArtK78]

P_Marlowe, on May 20 2008, 04:40 PM, said:

ArtK78, on May 20 2008, 01:55 PM, said:

EricK, on May 20 2008, 12:37 PM, said:

I think 3♠ is a mistake. 4♠ in response to FSF should show a hand like this . i.e. self supporting spades (good 7 or very good 6), and good 4 card hearts (else they wouldn't be mentioned in the first place). Bidding the grand is still difficult though, but certainly responder should drive to 6 with all his controls

Responder has aces and spaces. He has a hand worth 4 tricks - no more, no less. He may be able to tell from opener's bidding that a small slam is worthwhile, but even that is no easy task.

<snip>

Aces and spaces.

I wonder were this comes from.

He holds Aces.
An Ace is a great card, he has 4 great cards, which will
be helpfull for partner, no matter how his hands looks
like.
How often do you hold 4 cards which will be really helpful
for partner, ... besides having a fit for partner.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Aces are great cards. They take tricks.

Are there any cards in responder's hand other than the aces that are going to produce tricks?

Responder has 4 tricks for his partner. He should make it known that he has a game forcing hand. As for making a slam try, that is dependent on how the auction proceeds.

It is certainly a lot easier to see the slam potential of the two hands from the perspective of the opener with 7411 distribution than it is from the perspective of the responder with a flat hand with 4 aces.