Help
Fred posted long ago that he likes 3NT=6-5 or better in majors, weak and we'd like to give it a spin.
What do you think would be the best follow-ups?
We were thinking:
a)
4C->4D; 4M: slam try
4D: no preference (I guess also hands with 1-card preference would bid it)
4M: to play
4NT: 6RKC, I don't care about your voids.
b)
4C shortness ask (4D: 1-1, 4H: 2-0, 4S: 0-2)
4d+ as above.
Which one would you prefer, if any? Something short and snappy probably since it doesn't come up that much.
Page 1 of 1
3NT both majors
#1
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2014-May-30, 07:31
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 943
- Joined: 2012-April-15
- Gender:Male
Posted 2014-May-30, 10:33
Similar to your first idea:
4C = Puppet to 4D, then 4M is non-forcing slam-try
4D = Puppet to 4H. Then places the contract (which may be 4H, 4S or 5m)
4M = RKC in the bid suit
4NT = 6KCB
Other alternative:
4C = Optional RKCB in hearts. Opener bids 4D with no slam interest (then 4S is RKC)
4D = Optional RKCB in spades. Opener bids 4H with no slam interest (then 4NT is RKC)
4M = To play
4NT = 6KCB
5m = To play
4C = Puppet to 4D, then 4M is non-forcing slam-try
4D = Puppet to 4H. Then places the contract (which may be 4H, 4S or 5m)
4M = RKC in the bid suit
4NT = 6KCB
Other alternative:
4C = Optional RKCB in hearts. Opener bids 4D with no slam interest (then 4S is RKC)
4D = Optional RKCB in spades. Opener bids 4H with no slam interest (then 4NT is RKC)
4M = To play
4NT = 6KCB
5m = To play
#3
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2014-May-30, 12:12
In these situations, a method I like might be of interest. The idea is to force the person with the unbalanced hand to ask, thereby enabling Exclusion when that is possible.
Using the approach, 4♣ is a slam try in hearts. After this, +1 (4♦) is RKCB. +2 is Exclusion RKCB excluding the lower suit. +2 is Exclusion for the higher suit.
You can vary this theme, of course.
Using the approach, 4♣ is a slam try in hearts. After this, +1 (4♦) is RKCB. +2 is Exclusion RKCB excluding the lower suit. +2 is Exclusion for the higher suit.
You can vary this theme, of course.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,705
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2014-May-30, 13:26
It seems that we want to be able to play in 4M, to make a slam try in either major, to find out which major is longer, to initiate serious slam actions in either major, or to go with 6 keys. Can we do all of that? Well just about, although it is a bit of a squeeze. How about:
4♣ = asks for the longer major
... - 4♦ = longer spades
... - ... - 4♥ = slam try or better in spades
... - 4♥ = longer hearts
... - ... - 4♠ = slam try in spades
4♦ = slam try or better in hearts
4M = to play
4N = 6KCB
This is essentially using a similar idea as behind Ken's 1NT defence, so hopefully he also approves a little bit!
Another way would be to extend the relays to cover shortages:
4♣ = asks for the longer major
... - 4♦ = longer spades
... - ... - 4♥ = relay
... - ... - ... - 4♠ = 6511
... - ... - ... - 4NT = diamond void
... - ... - ... - 5♣ = club void
... - 4♥ = longer hearts
... - ... - 4♠ = relay
... - ... - ... - 4NT = 5611
... - ... - ... - 5m = void in m
4♦ = slam try in a major
... - 4♥ = decline in hearts
... - ... - 4♠ = slam try
... - 4♠ = accept hearts, decline spades
... - 4NT = accept both, no void
... - 5m = accept both, void in m
4M = to play
4N = 6KCB
I quite like this but it is probably not going to be worth it for an unusual sequence.
4♣ = asks for the longer major
... - 4♦ = longer spades
... - ... - 4♥ = slam try or better in spades
... - 4♥ = longer hearts
... - ... - 4♠ = slam try in spades
4♦ = slam try or better in hearts
4M = to play
4N = 6KCB
This is essentially using a similar idea as behind Ken's 1NT defence, so hopefully he also approves a little bit!
Another way would be to extend the relays to cover shortages:
4♣ = asks for the longer major
... - 4♦ = longer spades
... - ... - 4♥ = relay
... - ... - ... - 4♠ = 6511
... - ... - ... - 4NT = diamond void
... - ... - ... - 5♣ = club void
... - 4♥ = longer hearts
... - ... - 4♠ = relay
... - ... - ... - 4NT = 5611
... - ... - ... - 5m = void in m
4♦ = slam try in a major
... - 4♥ = decline in hearts
... - ... - 4♠ = slam try
... - 4♠ = accept hearts, decline spades
... - 4NT = accept both, no void
... - 5m = accept both, void in m
4M = to play
4N = 6KCB
I quite like this but it is probably not going to be worth it for an unusual sequence.
(-: Zel :-)
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,796
- Joined: 2008-September-12
- Gender:Male
Posted 2014-May-30, 16:04
gwnn, on 2014-May-30, 07:31, said:
Fred posted long ago that he likes 3NT=6-5 or better in majors, weak and we'd like to give it a spin.
What do you think would be the best follow-ups?
We were thinking:
a)
4C->4D; 4M: slam try
4D: no preference (I guess also hands with 1-card preference would bid it)
4M: to play
4NT: 6RKC, I don't care about your voids.
b)
4C shortness ask (4D: 1-1, 4H: 2-0, 4S: 0-2)
4d+ as above.
Which one would you prefer, if any? Something short and snappy probably since it doesn't come up that much.
What do you think would be the best follow-ups?
We were thinking:
a)
4C->4D; 4M: slam try
4D: no preference (I guess also hands with 1-card preference would bid it)
4M: to play
4NT: 6RKC, I don't care about your voids.
b)
4C shortness ask (4D: 1-1, 4H: 2-0, 4S: 0-2)
4d+ as above.
Which one would you prefer, if any? Something short and snappy probably since it doesn't come up that much.
I prefer scheme (a). It's more important to distinguish between good/bad hands for slam purposes than to locate Opener's void at the 4-level.
Page 1 of 1