[jh51]

---

We did not happen to have a method to show a void in response to the keycard ask, which worked out nicely when West lead A♣. With hearts 3-3, it was not necessary, but nice. The only trick I lost was to the K♦ in West's hand.

I thought that this hand was instructive, as at the other table the opening bid was 1♠ and they never got close to slam. The declarer made one more trick than I did, thanks to a diamond lead.

I counted 3 losers, so I thought opening 2♣ was appropriate. I don't know what the other South was thinking. This was worth 13 IMPs in a match we won by 4.

[mike777]

IT does seem wierd that opening 1s does not get you to slam.

It may be the opening bid was not the issue since you state you dont know what the other south was thinking and the other table did not get close to slam.

fwiw I dont know what north was thinking when they bid 4nt.

[jh51]

My teammates reported that their NS never investigated slam. I have to think it was a case of poor hand evaluation by South and/or North.

[mike777]

jh51, on 2012-June-21, 15:34, said:

My teammates reported that their NS never investigated slam. I have to think it was a case of poor hand evaluation by South and/or North.

perhaps but not opening 2c was not the problem then.

1s=2s(constructive)
4c(void)=4h
4nt(exc)=5d(1)
5nt(sp k ask outside of c)=6s

or a zillion other ways gets you there.

[Codo]

Instead of thinking of their poor judgement, try to improve your bidding:

Your partnership should not simple bid KC after 2 ♠. Why give up so much space? If you bid 3 Spade with the north hand (which is stronger then 4 Spade), south could have used a tool for asking for kcs outside clubs and in this case he could bid 6 spade with confidence in the given hand but 7 if the club king had been the diamond king...

[jh51]

But bidding 2c certainly allows North to know that you are in the alam zone. My partner said that after I opened 2c, it was going to be hard for her not to get us to a slam.

After the 1s opener, any bid by North that is not game forcing will likely prompt South to jump to game. (This was in the lowest of 3 KO brackets.) If he does that, it would be on North to make a slam try. North has 3 potential cover cards, and if South jumped to game it would suggest about a 5 loser hand.

[jh51]

Codo, on 2012-June-21, 15:43, said:

Instead of thinking of their poor judgement, try to improve your bidding:

Your partnership should not simple bid KC after 2 ♠. Why give up so much space? If you bid 3 Spade with the north hand (which is stronger then 4 Spade), south could have used a tool for asking for kcs outside clubs and in this case he could bid 6 spade with confidence in the given hand but 7 if the club king had been the diamond king...

I was south, so after 2♠ I was replying to parnter,

I would agree that partner might well have bid 3♠. We do not play Exlusion RKC, but a cue bidding sequence might have gotten us to 7 if partner had the ♦K.

[hrothgar]

jh51, on 2012-June-21, 15:08, said:

I thought that this hand was instructive, as at the other table the opening bid was 1♠ and they never got close to slam. The declarer made one more trick than I did, thanks to a diamond lead.

Any auction that can't find slam after a 1♠ really shouldn't be posted in "Intermediate / Advance Bridge Discussion"

I don't have a strong objection to a 1♠ opening. (I dislike opening 2♣ with two suit hand patterns).
However, North is sitting on a three card limit raise. Missing slam is incomprehensible.

The only thing that this hand proves is that there are lots of people who can't bid...

[Cyberyeti]

Playing what I play (Acol, 2/1 not GF), the auction would go:

1♠-2♣
2N (GF not necessarily balanced)-3♣ (I have a 5th one)
3♥(5+♠/4+♥ and big, we don't pass a 2♥ rebid so this is pretty large)-3♠
5♣ (4♣ would be natural, so this is exclusion)-5♥(1 or 4 excluding ♣)
5N (anything else ?)-6♠ (no A♣ or K♦)

It's not difficult to bid.

From Codo

Quote

Your partnership should not simple bid KC after 2 ♠. Why give up so much space? If you bid 3 Spade with the north hand (which is stronger then 4 Spade), south could have used a tool for asking for kcs outside clubs and in this case he could bid 6 spade with confidence in the given hand but 7 if the club king had been the diamond king...

It's more complicated than that, you need to know more than that partner has K♦ although I absolutely agree 3♠ is the right bid over 2♠.

Jxx, Axx, Kxx, Qxxx is a rotten grand and hasn't made 6 yet, Jxx, Ax, Kxxx, Qxxx is a 50/50 ish grand.

On the actual auction, S could have held AK(Q/x)xxxx, KQJx, Ax, void and the grand could have been laydown, S can't bid it in case partner has the ace of clubs not the ace of hearts (Give partner Jxxx, xx, KQx, Axxx).

[jh51]

For those who would prefer a 1♠ opener instead of 2♣, how would you have faired opposite

---

It seems that 4♠ is a heavy favorite to make, but you may well find yourself playing 1♠.

Yes, in that case EW might compete in clubs and give you another chance, but it seems to me that you could come up with hands for North where North should pass and EW should not compete, yet game was cold.

[kenrexford]

First, Opening 1♠ should not have caused a problem.

Second, the auction after opening 2♣ was unreasobaly quick.

I agree with others, therefore, that the opening bid was not the problem or the cure in either sequence.

[perko90]

I like the 2♣ bid, but nevertheless, 1♠ isn't unreasonable. With the club void, the hand isn't likely to get passed out, but yes, there is that danger. I'm sure the 1♠ advocates are well aware of it.
But it would be easy to get to slam after a 1♠ start and a 3-card LR from N.

[the hog]

I would not open 2C. 2 suiters are difficult to bid after a 2C opening. I cannot see why opening 1S would not get you to slam.

[mikl_plkcc]

Playing standard methods, North is at the upper end of limit raise, South is far above the upper end of one-level opening. Therefore, South should immediately start investigating slam hearing the limit raise.

However, things get messed up if opponents compete, therefore, I prefer the 2♣ opening.

Actually, my biggest objection to open 1♠ is something like #10, that can easily miss a game when opened 1♠. Therefore, if I think that a sub-minimum responder can get us a game, I open 2♣, to prevent the deal from passing out. (I also like to open 2♣ with a big offensive hand with no defensive values, i.e. only one trick short of game contained in my own hand, but without any defensive values in all the other suits.)

[SteveMoe]

I sense a peculiarity here - Say declarer does open 1♠. A 3-card limit raise will bid 1NT (absent other agreements). Declarer will rebid 3♥. Declarer rates to have a 5-loser for the jump shift. Responder's hand counts to 9 losers, and appears to have only 2 cover cards for opener (responder thinks 3).

Now things get a bit dicey.

3♠ by responder could be 4HCP and a false preference. 4♠ should be any 3-card raise with 7 support points. What does Responder do with this (balanced) 10 pointer? 3N will get declarer to pattern out but appears to show 2=3 in the majors. (4♣ is a gross distortion showing a weak hand and no desire to play a major. 4N would seem to be RKB, but for which suit? (Likely ♥)).

The 1♠ opener and the ensuing Jump Shift seem to create a situation where neither partner is well disposed to take charge. It certainly seems to make exploring 7♠ difficult.

I think the best responder can do is rebid 5♠ over opener's 3♥. At least we find 6.

Any thoughts how better to show a 3-card limit raise after 1♠-1N-3♥?

I much prefer 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3♠ - 5♣ EKCB...

[TWO4BRIDGE]

SteveMoe, on 2012-June-23, 03:05, said:

3♠ by responder could be 4HCP and a false preference. 4♠ should be any 3-card raise with 7 support points. What does Responder do with this (balanced) 10 pointer?

Any thoughts how better to show a 3-card limit raise after 1♠-1N-3♥?

I don't know if it is better, but I was taught that:
1S - 1NTF
3H - ??
....... 3S = weakest reply and may only be 2 cards ♠
....... 4S = 3 card limit raise
....... 4C/4D = some say advance cue for 2nd suit: ♥
....... 4H = to play
.......3NT = none of the above

[perko90]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-June-23, 03:26, said:

1S - 1NTF
3H - ??
....... 3S = weakest reply and may only be 2 cards ♠
....... 4S = 3 card limit raise

Yes! Me too. But it gets messed up all the time with people thinking it's a fast arrival situation.

[rmnka447]

I think 2 ♣ is right with the 3 loser hand. If you open the hand with 1 ♠, there's just no way for the strong hand to ever convince the responding hand that it's as good as it is.

However, I do have some big quibbles with the auction after the strong hand's 2 ♠ rebid.

Responder, at that point, only knows that opener has a near game ♠ hand. From what responder holds, there's no way to know what is needed to make a slam viable or not. Consider the following possibility (a slight but important modification of the actual hand held) --

♠ AKQxxx ♥ KQxx ♦ J10 ♣ A

This hand has the same number of losers as the actual hand held, but slam can easily be defeated with a ♦ lead. If the auction progressed as it actually occurred -- RKCB after the 2 ♠ bid, all the bids would be the same.

The point is that usually in auctions where one hand is much stronger than another, it's usually right for the big hand to captain the auction and solicit the needed information from the weaker hand. The big hand can usually see what's needed for slam and move the auction in a direction to see if partner has it.

So, like other posters have suggested, it's good to have responder simply define how good the responding hand with the rebid. A 3 ♠ rebid to me says more than enough for game with an Hxx or xxxx holding in the trump suit. 4 ♠ is a sign off -- 3+ trump and just enough for game.

Here's how the auction might proceed with the original hands -- using a disciplined rebidding approach and old fashioned As first cueing --

2♣ - 2 ♦ - 2 ♠

then

3 ♠ (Hxx or xxxx more than minimum game going values) [Opener can envision slam if responder holds ♥ A)]

4 ♣ (1st round ♣ control) [Opener initiates slam investigation for specific controls]

4 ♥ (1st round ♥ control, denies a 1st in ♦) [Responder shows the control he has, but this is enough for Opener to keep going]

5 ♣ (2nd round ♣ control, implies high ♠ honors) [ Opener can see that if responder has a 2nd in ♦, grand may be apossibility]

5 ♠ Responder has nothing more to say

6 ♠ Opener has already heard enough from responder


Now if the modified hand was held, the auction would proceed the same through 5 ♠, but opener would pass knowing there were 2 losers in ♦.

Those using cueing to show either a 1st or 2nd round control can produce something similar to get to the proper decision for slam or not.

[the hog]

jh51, on 2012-June-22, 09:02, said:

For those who would prefer a 1♠ opener instead of 2♣, how would you have faired opposite

---

It seems that 4♠ is a heavy favorite to make, but you may well find yourself playing 1♠.

Yes, in that case EW might compete in clubs and give you another chance, but it seems to me that you could come up with hands for North where North should pass and EW should not compete, yet game was cold.

rofl. You hold 20 points only and only and you believe your opponents won't compete. Capsar Milquetoast I have found you.

[ArtK78]

the hog, on 2012-June-23, 09:01, said:

rofl. You hold 20 points only and only and you believe your opponents won't compete. Capsar Milquetoast I have found you.

Of course it is possible that EW will not compete. Not only will there be some hands where both are balanced with 10 HCP each, but it is also possible that East, in passout seat, will have a marginal balance but will sniff out that something is wrong from his partner's failure to act over 1♠ and will work out to pass out 1♠.