[kenberg]

We start with a hand.

---

Not great. With a little help from my friends I am down 1 for a good board. Spades split 5-1, NT is a disaster even if partner guesses right on the initial diamond lead, the heart K is offside, etc.

Partner thought I had 5-5 and in fact alerted my 3♥ as a gf 5-5. Before the lead I explained that I was not aware of any such agreement.

Of course if spades are 5-1 and the heart finesse is off, this hand is not likely to play well in anything, and it doesn't. But simply looking at NS, where does it belong and how do you get there?

Pard said he plays 1♠-1NT-3♣ as artificial, bid with a variety of hands including this one. Perhaps so, but he forgot to tell me. I am willing to consider it. I have been in worse contracts than 4♠ but it is not really odds on. 4♥ is pretty awful since, even if the heart finesse is working, entries are a problem. A big problem on the actual hand since also clubs were 4-1, but a problem anyway.

Not everything is solvable, I know that. But thoughts are welcome.

[Cyberyeti]

19 opposite 6 usually bids game, the hand is a deathtrap, just move on.

I think I'd play 3N or 4♥ depending on what N chose.

[billw55]

kenberg, on 2016-April-12, 07:49, said:

Partner thought I had 5-5 and in fact alerted my 3♥ as a gf 5-5. Before the lead I explained that I was not aware of any such agreement.

Pard said he plays 1♠-1NT-3♣ as artificial, bid with a variety of hands including this one. Perhaps so, but he forgot to tell me.

Sounds like your partner made some assumptions that were not justified. In which case a subpar result is not surprising.

If I was north without firm agreements, I would bid 3♠ over 3♥ which allows south to rightside 3NT, bid 4♥ if 55, or 4♠ if 64. Seems simple enough, but people do get attached to their pet methods.

edit: oops, rightsiding impossible, but I still bid 3♠

[gszes]

I fail to see why not 3s by responder over 3h. This bid does not promise spade support it is merely a preference (4s would show spade support) and an inability to bid 3n xx xx xxxx AQxxx for ex. while the 3s bid might be much stronger than a min opener has to treat it as min until otherwise advised. Opener then bids 3n which unfortunately would go p p p and the bad club situation would sink us. Life happens but a ton of bidding space evaporated when 3h was bid. Not much room to explore. (see billw55)

[kenberg]

billw55, on 2016-April-12, 09:37, said:

Sounds like your partner made some assumptions that were not justified. In which case a subpar result is not surprising.

If I was north without firm agreements, I would bid 3♠ over 3♥ which allows south to rightside 3NT, bid 4♥ if 55, or 4♠ if 64. Seems simple enough, but people do get attached to their pet methods.

We started 1S-1NT so right siding the NT is not possible. But I also like the 3S call over 3H. The reasonable interpretation is "Pard, I had to do something, this is the best I can do at the moment". If I am 5-5 I can always try 4H, if I am what I am I can either go with 4S and hope for the best or I can bid 3NT and hope for the best. Hearts split 3-3, spades 5-1. No bidding agreement take care of that problem.

Pard is an enthusiast for bidding tools that I have never heard of. My view on such exotica is that unless we clearly need something, let's skip it. Here I do think 3S takes care of sorting out the hand. Maybe not all possible hands, but nothing does that.

I have been thinking of starting a collection of hands where I think some logical improv is better than obscure conventions. This hand could fit right in. I like 3S. It won't end the auction, I regard a jump shift followed by a part score pass as a hanging offense, and clarification can come on the next round if needed.

[SteveMoe]

A tool, perhaps? Meckstroth Adjunct - see page 10 in http://www.cincybrid...ng_In_Depth.pdf

[kenberg]

SteveMoe, on 2016-April-12, 13:37, said:

A tool, perhaps? Meckstroth Adjunct - see page 10 in http://www.cincybrid...ng_In_Depth.pdf

Interesting. As get it, using the Meckstroth option, the auction could begin 1♠-1NT-2NT-3♣-3♥-3♠
The description says, for the 3♣ call:

Waiting. 0-2 cards for opener's major suit.

I presume that 1♠-1NT-2NT-3♣-3♥-3♠ allows me to pass 3♠ . I infer this because

The auction 1♠-1NT-2NT-4♠ is described as

2+ Spades weak hand in support

So, again as I understand it, after 1♠-1NT-2NT, responder with something like pard has can opt for 4♠ and good luck to me, or opt for allowing me out at 3♠, an option I might take here. If we ever want to get out short of game with my 19 highs facing 6, this is probably the time.
Still...

Thinking a little more, maybe the greatest use would be finding a slam when in fact there is a fit.


Added: I looked around a bit at where that article came from:
Apparently it is part of
http://www.cincybrid...ning_points.htm
although I did not see exactly that article there.
I mention this as a site of possible interest to others.


Added again:
And i assume the Steven Moese mentioned there is you.
Nice site.

[msjennifer]

The point is, " Is a jump shift non reverse 100% game forcing opposite a partner with bare 5/6 HCP and no three card spade support or no four card heart support" ?Indeed partner should .on the given hand bid 3 spade and opener should pass it fully believing partner.Even with LTC which is applied when a 8 plus card fit exists gives the same result ,(although there is no such fit ),18 -(6+9)= 3.
Even playing LST,opener requires three cover cards for bidding game.Just give partner SQ,HK, and a minor suit queen, instead of club AJ, and it becomes a decent 4 spade contract.

[helene_t]

msjennifer, on 2016-April-13, 00:31, said:

The point is, " Is a jump shift non reverse 100% game forcing opposite a partner with bare 5/6 HCP and no three card spade support or no four card heart support" ?Indeed partner should .on the given hand bid 3 spade and opener should pass it fully believing partner.

3♠ by responder would obviously be forcing in Standard American. North could take a view and pass the 3♥ bid if he has a misfitting subminimum (opener is limited by not having opened 2♣), but opener can never pass in a GF situation since responder is only limited by his 1NT response which could be as strong as 11 points.

I agree with the concensus that 3♠ is the right bid here.

As for 3♣ being artifical: That is something Anton Maas (captain for the Dutch open team) likes. It is maybe an improvement of standard methods but I would think that if you want artificial methods you might as well play Gazilli and/or transfer rebids.

[wank]

msjennifer, on 2016-April-13, 00:31, said:

The point is, " Is a jump shift non reverse 100% game forcing opposite a partner with bare 5/6 HCP and no three card spade support or no four card heart support" ?

Yes it is.

[billw55]

kenberg, on 2016-April-12, 11:22, said:

We started 1S-1NT so right siding the NT is not possible.

LOL at me!

I guess make that "stop in 3NT" instead of "rightside 3NT"

I still think 3♠ is correct.

[jogs]

kenberg, on 2016-April-12, 07:49, said:

Not everything is solvable, I know that. But thoughts are welcome.

Even when we can each see our 2X13 cards, we can't see their 2X13 cards.

I would have rebid 3♠ with pard's hand also. 3♠ is false preference, guarantees 3 spades or 3 hearts.
The bid would not have solved this board. Can't know when suits break badly.

[Caitlynne]

The problem that this type of opening hand presents is one that is addressed effectively by the Gazzilli convention. In Gazzilli, one reaches a club contract after the auction begins:

1S - 1NT (forcing)
2C - 3C
3H - ?

2C is the Gazzilli waiting bid. 3C shows 4 to 7 HCP and 6 or 7 clubs. 3H is natural on a really good hand (e.g, 18 or 19 HCP) with at least mild support for clubs. I am not sure whether the hand is worth 4C or 5C at this point, but you will play clubs from the better side.

[kenberg]

billw55, on 2016-April-13, 06:30, said:

LOL at me!

I guess make that "stop in 3NT" instead of "rightside 3NT"

I still think 3♠ is correct.

Do ten Hail Zias and you will be forgiven, my son.

Cyberyeti, in the first reply, suggested (I paraphrase) that I just suck it up as a bad contract and move on. I pretty much agree, but still the hand strikes me as interesting.

I always lean toward on the spot creation of reasonable tries rather than on still another convention for a situation that seldom arises (and for which the convention may or may not work).

The Meckstroth Adjunct has merit. He is a bright buy. But no matter how many conventions we have there will always be times when we have to give it our best shot with the tools we have. Here, I think 3S over 3H is the best shot.

I agree that 3S does not promise three cards. And it cannot be passed. What to do? If I were to think of all the hands where I open 1S and make the jumps shift rebid of 3H over 1NT, I suppose this is about as close as I will ever get to a hand where 3NT might be my choice. Hardly a great contract. Depending on the location of the diamond AQ there will sometimes be no way of getting the guess right, sometimes no way of getting it wrong, and then there is the fifty-fifty chance of getting it right. If we get past that hurdle then clubs 3-2 with the Q onside will do it. Help!

4S it is not so great either. Maybe they split 3-3. So that gives me four spades, two clubs and a heart, I need more.

4H is sort of interesting. If I start with AK and another spade ruffed, this might establish spades and give me an entry to the board to take the heart finesse. If this works it seems I might then just play the ace, leave two hearts out, and then play another spade, tossing a diamond. Possibly I lose only two hearts and a diamond. If spades are 4-2 with W holding the doubleton, I might still be ok.
Strange things can happen. As it went, the stiff spade was led on my left, and since there was a stiff club on my right they got a club ruff and a spade ruff. Lho now, I guess, realized I was out of clubs also so she played a diamonds and another diamond. The heart Ace and another heart cleared the hearts and gave me an entry to the board. The hand records say I can always make 9 tricks in hearts but of course that is seeing all the cards. It seems to me that I was helped.

[PhilG007]

kenberg, on 2016-April-12, 07:49, said:

We start with a hand.

---

Not great. With a little help from my friends I am down 1 for a good board. Spades split 5-1, NT is a disaster even if partner guesses right on the initial diamond lead, the heart K is offside, etc.

Partner thought I had 5-5 and in fact alerted my 3♥ as a gf 5-5. Before the lead I explained that I was not aware of any such agreement.

Of course if spades are 5-1 and the heart finesse is off, this hand is not likely to play well in anything, and it doesn't. But simply looking at NS, where does it belong and how do you get there?

Pard said he plays 1♠-1NT-3♣ as artificial, bid with a variety of hands including this one. Perhaps so, but he forgot to tell me. I am willing to consider it. I have been in worse contracts than 4♠ but it is not really odds on. 4♥ is pretty awful since, even if the heart finesse is working, entries are a problem. A big problem on the actual hand since also clubs were 4-1, but a problem anyway.

Not everything is solvable, I know that. But thoughts are welcome.

The poster shouldn't beat him/herself over this. Even the Grandmasters don't get it right 100%
of the time. The bidding system hasn't been invented that covers all the bases.

[billw55]

kenberg, on 2016-April-13, 07:45, said:

Cyberyeti, in the first reply, suggested (I paraphrase) that I just suck it up as a bad contract and move on. I pretty much agree, but still the hand strikes me as interesting.

(and more stuff about specific contracts)

Agree. The bidding could have been better, but the result would not be much different. I think that on these cards, all systems should reach game, mostly going down. Just bridge, next hand.

[msjennifer]

wank, on 2016-April-13, 06:04, said:

Yes it is.

If so, then three hearts looks like a slight overbid.with so many losers and not very great suits either.It Is unfortunate that one can't bid two and a half hearts.Or is 2 NT also a bid to consider? What do the the text books suggest for this ,a little bit difficult to rebid ,hand?

[helene_t]

msjennifer, on 2016-April-13, 09:29, said:

If so, then three hearts is an overbid.with so many losers and not very great suits either.

Yes that is a fair point. On the other hand, 2♥ with this hand as well as with some random 11-count gives responder a hard time with a minimum with four hearts. Or with a 8-count with 1-3 in the majors.

You pick your poison. Playing 3♥ as forcing for one round only would surely have some advantages, it is just very non-standard. The main disadvantage is that responder can't temporize with 3♠ with a decent hand with no clear direction. It also possibly creates uncertainty about the forcing character of a subsequent 4m bid by responder.

[kenberg]

1♠-1NT-2♥-P would certainly produce a top here, but imagine responder''s hand changed a little, say Qx or Jxx of diamonds instead of Jx and suddenly our chances in 3NT are much better. It's true that they still aren't great but responder is also still a long way from making a second call over 2♥. I won't be bidding 2♥ next time.

The Meckstroth Adjunct, mentioned above, might have rescued us here. Maybe, maybe not. And I know nothing of Gazilli, mentioned earlier by Helene. I keep seeing it mentioned and often praised. My initial reaction to a convention that I am unfamiliar with is usually "Do we really have to?". But I could try to get past this attitude. Sometimes I do.

But w/o the aid of gadgetry, I think I open 1♠ and rebid 3♥ the next time I am dealt this. I am not so sure this is simply me being stubborn, it seems right to me.

[msjennifer]

I know that the tale will sound fictitious but here it is! Today I gave the responders hand to my favourite partner also playing Standard and LTc and SST and LST. I opened 1Spade and it may surprise us all HE PASSED.When I asked him to clarify his pass,he said " I have only 4 working HCP,and so I can give you only one trick.I have NINE losers and no fit.I can compete later upto 2 spade.You have not opened 2 Clubs which is the bid with a nine winners hand,nor have you opened 2 NT.1S is hardly allowed to stand so if you indeed have a double suited strong hand you will bid it.I can then decide my action." By the way,he is not cognisant of any internet bridge being too old(81 years) and so please don't have any suspicions in your mind that perhaps he knew the hand.