[RunemPard]

Game all, Board 7 of 28

Opponents are silent...Partner opens

1♦-1♥
2♣-2♠*
4♥-???


♠AK5
♥KT8762
♦97
♣K7


NV/V, Board 25 of 28...Partner opens

1♦-(P)-1♠-(P)
2♣-(2♥)-???


♠AQ97
♥-
♦Q7652
♣AQ42

[the_clown]

1. It will be nice to know something about your style. Would you raise ♥ with 1354 and a minimum hand? How light do you open?

Normally jumping to game after GF has been set up shows minimum, but here partner doesn't even know about the 5th ♥. It looks like he needs to have a stiff spade and 3 good hearts for his bid. x AQx KJxxx Axxx looks like the best hand he may have, otherwise I don't see a reason to not to leave more room for investigation

2. I would start with 3♥, intending to bid 4♦ over the expected 3N.

[nige1]

RunemPard, on 2013-November-13, 17:03, said:

Game all, Board 7 of 28... Opponents are silent...Partner opens
♠ A K 5 ♥ K T 8 7 6 2 ♦ 9 7 ♣ K 7
1♦-1♥
2♣-2♠*
4♥-???

NV/V, Board 25 of 28...Partner opens
♠ A Q 9 7 ♥- ♦ Q 7 6 5 2 ♣ A Q 4 2
1♦-(P)-1♠-(P)
2♣-(2♥)-???

IMO

• 4♠ = 10, Pass = 9, 4N = 8.
• 4♥ = 10, 3♥ = 8.

[rhm]

the_clown, on 2013-November-13, 18:44, said:

1. It will be nice to know something about your style. Would you raise ♥ with 1354 and a minimum hand? How light do you open?

Normally jumping to game after GF has been set up shows minimum, but here partner doesn't even know about the 5th ♥. It looks like he needs to have a stiff spade and 3 good hearts for his bid. x AQx KJxxx Axxx looks like the best hand he may have, otherwise I don't see a reason to not to leave more room for investigation

2. I would start with 3♥, intending to bid 4♦ over the expected 3N.

1. I agree. This is impossible to answer without having agreements on the 4♥ bid. I dislike "Fast Arrival" opposite an unlimited partner and quiet opponents. It invariably preempts partner. Picture jumps with good hands are much more useful

2. Jumping to 4♥ must be better than 3♥. Opener will assume you agree clubs, but you can always correct clubs to diamonds. In my book 4♥ would be exclusion keycard with both black suits being keycards, tentatively agreeing clubs.

Rainer Herrmann

[PhilKing]

On auction one, 4♥ does not exist (unless you assign it to show an exact hand). The reason is that it makes it impossible to bid 4SF and then agree a minor with slam interest.

[RunemPard]

1st time playing together with 30 minutes before play to discuss. You know about as much as I did.

[wyman]

RunemPard, on 2013-November-14, 13:53, said:

1st time playing together with 30 minutes before play to discuss. You know about as much as I did.

I pass. I'm minimum, and my spades are wasted opposite partner's shortness. My CK may be golden, but partner has eaten up my ability to do anything intelligent.

[mike777]

RunemPard, on 2013-November-14, 13:53, said:

1st time playing together with 30 minutes before play to discuss. You know about as much as I did.

Ok then in that case:

1) pass
2) 6c or 6d

[Fluffy]

Hand one partner has a good 1354, and I can see 12 tricks on a bad lead from opps most of the time, or perhaps if we capture ♥J or ♥Q, even cold 12 tricks are possible, but no play for 6 I only see when 2 aces are missing, so I would go for blackwood.

Hand 2 4♥ looks obvious.

[RunemPard]

Will post hands later tonight.

[JLOGIC]

PhilKing, on 2013-November-14, 05:38, said:

On auction one, 4♥ does not exist (unless you assign it to show an exact hand). The reason is that it makes it impossible to bid 4SF and then agree a minor with slam interest.

He can bid a slam over 4H if he has that hand. It seems pretty terrible for grand slam bidding but fine for slams, if partner has a big 1354 we can place the contract pretty intelligently on non grand hands.

I would just keycard and bid 6H opposite the right amount with our actual hand.

[RunemPard]

1st hand...

Spoiler

---

Partner has what most described, sadly a wasted ♣Q rather than the ♥J. The slam is ok if west holds the 4 hearts!

Result: Down 2 for 13 IMPs to EW who played 3NT= on the other table.

2nd hand...

Spoiler

---

Think this one speaks for itself...Our entire night seemed to go like this. :-/

Result: Down 1 for 11 IMPs to EW who played 3NT+2 on the other table.

[rhm]

RunemPard, on 2013-November-17, 03:52, said:

2nd hand...

Spoiler

---

Think this one speaks for itself...Our entire night seemed to go like this. :-/

Result: Down 1 for 11 IMPs to EW who played 3NT+2 on the other table.

This is one of many reasons why I prefer bidding 1NT (over 1♠) with the South hand.
I would do this even if a spade raise by opener promises four cards.
In fact although 2♣ is the standard rebid recommended in many books I consider it a poor bid. It is a leftover from times when XYZ and similar approaches were unknown. The rebid of 2♣ should either show more points or more distribution.
The expert community is moving in this direction. The world will follow.

Rainer Herrmann

[RunemPard]

rhm, on 2013-November-17, 08:11, said:

This is one of many reasons why I prefer bidding 1NT (over 1♠) with the South hand.
I would do this even if a spade raise by opener promises four cards.
In fact although 2♣ is the standard rebid recommended in many books I consider it a poor bid. It is a leftover from times when XYZ and similar approaches were unknown. The rebid of 2♣ should either show more points or more distribution.
The expert community is moving in this direction. The world will follow.

Rainer Herrmann

The ironic thing is we were playing xyz.