[hrussin]

---

My partner and I were practicing bidding with a "goulash" hand (3-at-a-time deals) and got this very strange distributional hand. I've included how our bidding went—any help and tips with how this should go? I haven't encountered anything this wild in any of the "basic bidding" instructions I've read. I imagine that E&W would also have piped up.

[smerriman]

Are you actually looking for how to bid in a goulash context, or as if it were a real hand? Because when playing goulash, you should be using completely different systems to normal bidding; but if it somehow popped in real life, you're probably going to have to admit that no matter what you do, it's probably not going to work out well.

[hrussin]

smerriman, on 2018-March-03, 19:10, said:

Are you actually looking for how to bid in a goulash context, or as if it were a real hand? Because when playing goulash, you should be using completely different systems to normal bidding; but if it somehow popped in real life, you're probably going to have to admit that no matter what you do, it's probably not going to work out well.

Thanks for the reply – we were bidding it as actual practice/real life.

[hrothgar]

hrussin, on 2018-March-03, 19:26, said:

Thanks for the reply – we were bidding it as actual practice/real life.

https://www.youtube....h?v=Ow0lr63y4Mw

[steve2005]

If your bidding system handles these hand which come up once every 10 years, you probably cant cover hands that come up all the time. Plus when you have these hands so do opps usually, so your system will wont be usable anyways. So forget about it.

If you know your playing ghoulish that's different and you can make a try to handle it by system.

[ahydra]

I've found it's a false economy to bother showing the 2nd suit when holding 7+ in one suit and just 4 of another. North should just focus on his spades: 1S-2C; 4S-pass. I don't think you can realistically not play in game.

ahydra

[neilkaz]

ahydra, on 2018-March-04, 16:43, said:

I've found it's a false economy to bother showing the 2nd suit when holding 7+ in one suit and just 4 of another. North should just focus on his spades: 1S-2C; 4S-pass. I don't think you can realistically not play in game.

ahydra

Same bidding for me. Noting the 9 card suit.

[fourdad]

the clearest and most accurate description of your hand is just to open 4S. Counting distributional points and the like, as an opener..before any fit is established, rarely works out well. I consider that you are short of a 1S opening hand.

[Tramticket]

ahydra, on 2018-March-04, 16:43, said:

I've found it's a false economy to bother showing the 2nd suit when holding 7+ in one suit and just 4 of another. North should just focus on his spades: 1S-2C; 4S-pass. I don't think you can realistically not play in game.

ahydra

the first thing to say is that Goulash is not bridge and basing bidding systems and judgments on these freak deals is counterproductive. They don't happen in real life.

If in some strange world I was dealt this North hand then I agree, that I am not considering anything other than spades as trumps. My problem with opening 1♠ and rebidding 4♠ is that you have even more offensive strength than partner will expect - you have a three loser hand with a nine-card suit and two voids. You are showing a strong hand - but this strong???

I would probably rebid 5♠!!

Of course it works horribly here, but that's what comes of Goulashes.

[TheoKole]

The only advice that I could offer for these types of hands is for the very very strong types of Goulash hands 10 + ironclad tricks (through bookkeeping I have found that these types will come up in a partnership around 3 to 4 times a year- regular partnership who play in tournaments and club together every week). The only reason I use a special system is because these hands usually cause a slam swing and can win or lose a team match by themselves.

I use 3 NT opener or a 3 NT immediate JUMP overcall as a command bid (I truly detest Gambling 3 NT) , commanding partner to bid the suit of their lowest Ace, 4 NT can then be used to bid by opener to ask for another higher Ace or lower suit King.

AK ♠
-- ♥
AKQJ109732 ♦
Kx ♣

3NT (command bid - Show your lowest Ace)
4 ♣ Shows Ace of ♣
4 NT (Show a higher ace or lower or equal suit King)
5 NT (I don't have anything else to show)
7 ♦ (to play)

Notice that I know on the first round whether 7 ♦ is a lock or not, I can always bid 6 ♦; gambling that partner to have the Q ♣ or an entry 8 ♦ for a finesse in ♣.

This is an actual hand that came up on BBO with a regular partner I had. We were NOT playing this system yet and it actually took me 6 or 7 rounds of bidding to demand that ♦ to be trumps and to get him to cue bid the Ace ♣ (seriously) just in time also. Other tables bidding was crazy, unthinking or truly bad. (example - 2 ♣ - 2 ♦ - 6 ♦; What is the point of opening 2 ♣ (strong) and rebidding 6 ♦?

What is partner supposed to do? How does he know what to do?

Anyways there are some other relays and inferences when ops interfere over your 3 NT bid, also that I can elaborate on if you are interested.

Good luck