[ArtK78]

Matchpoints. All Vul.

---

1NT was a good 14 to 17.

2♦ was DONT - Diamonds and a major.

You can bid 2NT Lebensohl, or 3♣ natural and forcing, or something else. Gerber is available, but what do you do if partner shows 2 aces? 5♣ would be a king ask.

Question #1 - What do you bid over 2♦?

In any event, LHO is going to bid 5♦ over your action and partner is going to double.

Question #2 - What now?

[Fluffy]

Partner will double always since he has 2 clubs, even with a supper diamond holding such as ♦AJx
I think 3♣ is clear as a start, I would like to rebid 4♣ to suggest a big ammount of them without voids, to let partner know I am ooking for aces.

As it is now, I would do this simple math:
partner has 16, opponents have 15, the aces rate to split 2-2 so I don't think slam is making.
They will ruff our clubs from the start, and then we have around 15 HCP left to make 3 tricks against their 15. We rate to make 3 tricks on defence. So I would pass the double.


I had 9 clubs and ♠A not long ago opposite 1NT from partner, I reasoned the same way and partner had all of the missing aces

[mike777]

5c, pass

pard knows I have long clubs and not much else

If 5dx makes ok...next bd I am not good at bidding/making low hcp minor suit slams.

[helene_t]

Agree with Mike

[rhm]

Start with 3♣.
Over 3NT jump to 5♣. This must be stronger than an immediate 5♣. A good partner should bid 6♣ with three aces. He can anticipate your problem missing so many aces.
Over 5♦ I bid 6♣.
Yes we are an underdog making 6♣ and they are an underdog making 5♦.
But when vulnerable opponents bid like that, that either 6♣ will make or that 5♦ doubled will or will be a very good score for them anyway, in which case you risk little to gain big, is not an underdog.
It is even conceivable that both 6♣ and 5♦ make, e.g.

---

Maybe they will choose the wrong lead or continuation against 6♣.

Rainer Herrmann

[PhilKing]

rhm, on 2013-November-15, 05:05, said:

Start with 3♣.
Over 3NT jump to 5♣. This must be stronger than an immediate 5♣. A good partner should bid 6♣ with three aces. He can anticipate your problem missing so many aces.
Over 5♦ I bid 6♣.
Rainer Herrmann

I don't believe pard would double on your example hand.

[Zelandakh]

ArtK78, on 2013-November-14, 23:48, said:

Gerber is available, but what do you do if partner shows 2 aces? 5♣ would be a king ask.

Just as an aside, I think it is better for 4NT (or rolling) to be the king ask when it is available rather than 5♣. That is because you should only be using Gerber with a distributional hand and therefore want to be able to stop in a suit more often than in 4NT. Plus it saves space.

[ArtK78]

This was the full hand:

---

1NT was a good 14 to 17.

2♦ was DONT.

3♣ was natural and game forcing.

We wound up getting 800 against 5♦x for an above average score.

I don't think this problem is really solvable. Maybe you can guess better than I did. Maybe slam is reachable after a 1♥ opening, as the opponents will probably not intervene. It is still a difficult hand to bid. Our 2/1 is not game forcing, so I would not have the luxury of bidding 2♣ followed by 3♣ if partner opened 1♥.

[Cyberyeti]

ArtK78, on 2013-November-15, 07:38, said:

This was the full hand:

---

Maybe slam is reachable after a 1♥ opening, as the opponents will probably not intervene. It is still a difficult hand to bid. Our 2/1 is not game forcing, so I would not have the luxury of bidding 2♣ followed by 3♣ if partner opened 1♥.

We can bid this one pretty trivially after a 1♥ opener, but it's still a slight guess:

1♥(4+)-2♣(Not GF)
2N(GF not necessarily balanced, we play a weak NT)-3♣(5+♣)
3♥(5+♥ not 4♦)-3♠(spade stop, possible suit)
4♣(no ♦ stop, 3♣)-4♦(kickback)
4♥(0/3)-5♣(signoff opposite 0)
5N(3, no side K but other goodies)-6♣

I suppose it's just possible partner has A10x, AJ109x, QJ, Axx but anything better than this or a doubleton spade is sufficient, and even this has chances.

It's more difficult for a strong NT pair with 2♣/3♣ NF, basically the club hand has to work out his partner is non minimum then ask aces and rely on an extra trick materialising somewhere from the extra values or a doubleton spade.

[rhm]

ArtK78, on 2013-November-15, 07:38, said:

This was the full hand:

---

1NT was a good 14 to 17.

2♦ was DONT.

3♣ was natural and game forcing.

We wound up getting 800 against 5♦x for an above average score.

I don't think this problem is really solvable. Maybe you can guess better than I did. Maybe slam is reachable after a 1♥ opening, as the opponents will probably not intervene. It is still a difficult hand to bid. Our 2/1 is not game forcing, so I would not have the luxury of bidding 2♣ followed by 3♣ if partner opened 1♥.

Guess PHILKING wouldn't have doubled with the East hand, but most players invariably do.

Rainer Herrmann

[ArtK78]

rhm, on 2013-November-15, 08:12, said:

Guess PHILKING wouldn't have doubled with the East hand, but most players invariably do.

Rainer Herrmann

What does West do if East does not double 5♦?

Before you answer 6♣, suppose East was 0-2 in the red suits? Still 6♣?

[PhilKing]

rhm, on 2013-November-15, 08:12, said:

Guess PHILKING wouldn't have doubled with the East hand, but most players invariably do.

Rainer Herrmann

Yes - very difficult to make an FP with three aces, a fit, a doubleton spade and a marked void or stiff diamond opposite. The hand is virtually insoluble.

[rhm]

ArtK78, on 2013-November-15, 08:28, said:

What does West do if East does not double 5♦?

Before you answer 6♣, suppose East was 0-2 in the red suits? Still 6♣?

Probably no with a doubleton diamond, but West certainly knows on the actual hand that this is not possible. .
I do not claim 6♣ will always win, but of course there should be a difference between Pass and Double.
One issue is whether Pass is forcing. Philking plays it as forcing.
I play few passes as forcing. Why should it be? 3♣ was forcing, but not to game.
In this case DBL would show a better hand than Pass.
That opener can not have diamonds is obvious.

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

rhm, on 2013-November-15, 08:43, said:

3♣ was forcing, but not to game.

Forcing to what then? Can you give an example of a sequence dying below 3NT? I think GF is a practical definition for most players.

[ArtK78]

PhilKing, on 2013-November-15, 08:30, said:

Yes - very difficult to make an FP with three aces, a fit, a doubleton spade and a marked void or stiff diamond opposite. The hand is virtually insoluble.

So, Phil, suppose opener's hand was AQ Qxxxx AJx Axx. Still a forcing pass? Presumably responder, with Kxx xx --- KQJTxxxx would now bid 6♣. Of course, the opps could lead a diamond. But the slam starts with no play.

[rhm]

Zelandakh, on 2013-November-15, 09:24, said:

Forcing to what then? Can you give an example of a sequence dying below 3NT? I think GF is a practical definition for most players.

Good question.
Maybe it is game forcing. I am not sure whether for example 3♣--3any--4♣ is considered forcing in this system.
I am not familiar with this system, since I myself play rubensol (transfers over interference)
Lebensol usually means you distinguish between weak and invitational hands, but then 3♣ is usually not forcing.
If 3♣ is game forcing then I would consider pass as forcing over 5♦, but only then.
Partner must have unconditionally forced to game before I play forcing passes.

Rainer Herrmann

[aguahombre]

The DONT overcall, would make this one a lot less convoluted than a PASS would have. Natural, forcing 3C followed by 4C Minorwood. Would save all that time and energy of going thru a Walsh Relay or whatever others might have available.

[Zelandakh]

rhm, on 2013-November-15, 09:36, said:

I am not familiar with this system, since I myself play rubensol (transfers over interference)
Lebensol usually means you distinguish between weak and invitational hands, but then 3♣ is usually not forcing.

I prefer playing transfers here too. Whether you have an invite in lower-ranking suits available depends on the version - my simple form does not and invites have to either pick one or start with a double.

The most common versions of Lebensohl distinguish between competitive and GF for lower-ranking suits and between competitive, invitational and GF in higher-ranking suits. That essentially gives the same options as for the simple transfer scheme.

As it happens, Lebensohl works better on this hand - after 1NT - (2♦) - 2NT - (5♦) it is clear that a FP cannot be on, thus giving Opener fewer options. Perhaps that makes it more appealing to jump in clubs when playing transfers.

[ArtK78]

aguahombre, on 2013-November-15, 10:30, said:

The DONT overcall, would make this one a lot less convoluted than a PASS would have. Natural, forcing 3C followed by 4C Minorwood. Would save all that time and energy of going thru a Walsh Relay or whatever others might have available.

I find this less than convincing. It is the same as saying that 4♣ is always Gerber.

For what it is worth, my partner and I have agreed that in forcing sequences involving a one suited minor suited hand, 4 of the other minor is ace asking. So, perhaps 3♣ followed by 4♦ in an uncontested auction would be ace asking. But that is not what happened at the table.

[mikeh]

I simply do not understand how anyone, playing a 14+ -17 1N can treat the opening hand as a 1N opener.

It has 6 controls.....surely any decent player knows to upgrade Aces when one holds 3 of them. It possesses a decent 5 card major, and surely any decent player sees that this hand is far better than, say, AQ AQxx Jxxx Axx? And the latter is a maximum.

When one's hand evaluates to half a trick or so stronger than a good maximum, it is time to stop imitating an abacus and try to be a bridge player.

Now, I am not at all saying that reaching slam is going to be easy after 1♥ compared to 1N. For one thing, responder has a far more difficult immediate decision since S is likely to pass, with KJxxx in opener's suit. Do we 2/1 with our 9 count and misfit? I'd bid 1N, forcing, and be happy for once that it is absolutely forcing for me....now opener bids 2N....

For me, I have a 3♠ call because I play transfers here: 3♠ says I have the values for at least 4♣, tho I may be passing 3N.

Opener has a spectacular hand in context...again, methods matter...mine would see opener rebid 4♣, announcing a good hand for clubs and denying the diamond Ace. Whether responder now risks a major cue is interesting, but it surely isn't irrational to assume that a partner showing interest in clubs, rather than 3N, has 3 Aces and we don't need a lot more once that is the case.

As it is, given the OP misbid of 1N, I'd bid as rhm advocated.