[rbforster]

We had a couple uncontested strong club relay auctions in the NAOP qualifier yesterday and here was one of the more difficult ones. This was opener's hand:

---

After a relay auction starting with 1♣ (16+) and 2♣ (inv+ single suited diamonds), responder proceeded to show a 7+ diamond suit with a singleton heart and no void. Typical shapes would be 2173 or 3172. He also showed minimum GF values, around ~8-10 hcp and specifically <=6 QPs (where A,K,Q=3,2,1). What would you bid next here, assuming you can sign off in any game or inquire about specific honors (denial cues) by bidding 4♣?

[akhare]

With a combined maximum of 18 QPs and a misfit, it seems to come down to a question of 4♥ / 3N.

3N seems better with a lead coming into the ♠ tenance. Also, we probably won't be able to declare 4♥ because of the presumed 4♦ terminator puppet...

[kenrexford]

A good idea sometimes when bidding with a non-standard system is to imagine the more standard auction and then to default to that contract when in doubt.

The presumable normal sequence would be a heart opening, a forcing 1NT, and then some series of calls where Opener shows six hearts, with Responder possibly iontroducing diamonds along the way in a way very non-interesting to Opener. Responder, in that situation, would likely be deciding between 4♥ and 5♦ by looking at his hand.

Your auction has a Responder who has been forced into answering questions. But, among the questions was apparently nothing that suggested, yet, a heart suit worth taking over. So, he should probably react similarly if you bid 4♥, assuming that 4♥ offers a final contract. Presumably partner can override if his hand merits this.

3NT seems to run against this thinking, as Responder would be unlikely to have that problem presented to him in a parallel but natural sequence.

So, for me I'd bid 4♥.

[shevek]

Need to learn when to break.

I like 2♥ over 2♣, assuming it's not some silly reverse relay.
I realise you have 4 1st round controls but experience suggests breaking early with a shortage in partner's suit.
If breaks guarantee shortage, responder knows how to evaluate his long suit.
If you can't bring yourself to break first time, at least do it over 2♠, assuming this showed heart shortage.

Relay is fun. In the early days I used to grind it out. These days I'm always looking for reasons not to relay.
Anyway, 4♥ is clear enough.

I suppsose partner might have a silly slam hand like
xx, x, KQJT9xx, Kxx. Or even

Kx, Q, Qxxxxxx, Kxx.

Go with the odds.

[Free]

Why didn't I bid 2♥ over 2♣?

[rbforster]

Thank you for all the feedback. I agree that relay breaks are on my list for system improvements. For those who bid 2♥ and hear partner persist with 3♦, is your next move 3N or 3♥?

Regarding Ken's point of thinking about what normal auctions might be to help pick a field contract, at the point where I was picking games, I would judge the following would be possible "standard" auctions:

1♥-1N-3♣-3♦-3♥?
1♥-1N-2♣-2♦
1♥-1N-2♣-3♦
1♥-3♦

Notes on our system, for those who might be interested or offer suggestions:
2♥ would have been a stronger relay, GF relay even if partner has only the invitational diamond hand, so that wasn't available as natural. Over 2♠, normally high (♠) shortness, I relayed since partner was likely to have 2-3 hearts, but he can still have hi/mid shortness with 7xx1 and unfortunately it turned out he showed short hearts. I suppose I could still bid 3♥ over 2♠, but that seemed like catering to a worst case and would give up a lot of our slam tools which might be appropriate if we have a heart fit.

[mycroft]

1) Did anyone bid hearts in the relay auction? That is, is declarer in a heart contract fixed yet? If not, is responder playing it (because of the terminator)? (ah, I see the auction, and the answer is "no, and yes".

Yeah, it looks like 3NT might be the right place, just because I'm playing it. let's hope that if partner's tricks are in diamonds, at least some of the RPs are an entry....

4♥ even the wrong way up is going to be right if partners got two dead clubs (but Tx isn't dead!); bit if partner's got three, then it's probably going to take same tricks in NT as hearts (it's not as if we're going to get a diamond lead, at least first!) This is a much easier question in the GNT qualifier (where I don't care about 400 vs 420 vs 430).

[rbforster]

Here were the hands (rotated for South declaring). I bid 3N facing the misfit, and partner raised to (an undiscussed) 4N hoping to suggest a solid suit, which I passed.

---

3N by South is cold with an endplay at T1 (a heart lead got my hopes up for the T♥ holding), while 4N made when West switched to a spade after rising with the Q♣ at T2.

6♦ by South would have been an excellent contract with play for an overtrick, needing only 2 out of 3 of: not 5-1♦, Qxx♥ or shorter, or K♠ onside. Would your methods have been able to find this?

[akhare]

rbforster, on 2011-November-09, 10:35, said:

Would your methods have been able to find this?

Does opener's 1♣ opening show at least 9+ QPs? If so, responder might take a view by zooming past 3N showing 8+ QPs? It's a lie in this case, but seems like it's either that or 5♦ / 6♦.

Granted, opener can holding something like AKQ of ♥, AK of ♠ or equivalent holdings with two top losers in ♣s, but it seems to be worth the shot.

In the new Moscito, there's a special response for a solid suit over the 1♣ opening, making this hand a cinch...

[rbforster]

akhare, on 2011-November-09, 11:01, said:

Does opener's 1♣ opening show at least 9+ QPs? If so, responder might take a view by zooming past 3N showing 8+ QPs? It's a lie in this case, but seems like it's either that or 5♦ / 6♦.

I don't think we explicitly promise QPs with our opener (16+ hcp), but it's almost always 9+. In our auction, responder had already failed to zoom showing his QPs as 6 or less. Normally over a 3N signoff, we bid on in steps starting at 9+ QPs, but of course that doesn't apply here since he already showed his strength. This particular sequence hadn't occurred to me, but useful treatments might be solid/non-solid suit distinctions, as well as extra length beyond 7 (which we don't explicitly show).

[hrothgar]

akhare, on 2011-November-09, 11:01, said:

Does opener's 1♣ opening show at least 9+ QPs? If so, responder might take a view by zooming past 3N showing 8+ QPs? It's a lie in this case, but seems like it's either that or 5♦ / 6♦.

Granted, opener can holding something like AKQ of ♥, AK of ♠ or equivalent holdings with two top losers in ♣s, but it seems to be worth the shot.

In the new Moscito, there's a special response for a solid suit over the 1♣ opening, making this hand a cinch...

This is definitely an easy hand for MOSCITO.

All sorts of nice things will happen, including the ability to get South to declare a diamond contract and the ability to identify the Jack of Diamonds.
The 1♣ - 3♣ isn't all that common, but when it comes up its golden...

[steve2005]

My stab at bidding this
1C - 3NT(solid minor 7+)
4D (sets trump asks for outside controls)- 4H (no outside controls)
6D

[Zelandakh]

I use a 2NT response to 1C to show a solid suit and found these hand types difficult to get right before incorporating this feature into the system. I did not know Moscito has a similar bid; I guess I need to look up the relays used there to see how they compare to mine.