[cnszsun]

Scoring: IMP

1♠-2♣-(2♦)
3♠-4♣
4♦-4♥
4♠-6NT

---

Opponents bid only once, 2♦.
6♠ or 7♣ make, but 6NT have no chance after ♦ lead.
After 4♠, south was thinking of bidding 5NT (pick a slam), but they have never discussed this, so he gived it up. Supposing you don't have this tool, pls make your comments.

[jillybean]

I don't like 3♠ but can understand the bid.
What is 4♦?

1♠:2♣ (2♦)
2♠:3♥
3♠:4♣
5♣:6♣

[hrothgar]

6NT seems premature...

I like the rest of the auction

[Robert]

Hi jillybeans2

I assume that the 4D bid is a cuebid 'in support' of clubs.

If you agree to play COG(choice of game) cuebids, the 4D bid asks partner to 'pick a suit. If the COG bidder continues with a later 5C bid, the 4D bid would now show a mild slam try in clubs showing 'a diamond' cuebid(also known as an advance cuebid)

Regards,
Robert

[foo]

I agree with hrothgar that 6N is "blasting" more than necessary or necessarily smart.

I'm not sure how much I like the previous auction, but ATM I'm equally not sure what I like better either.

But leaping to 6N with two levels of bidding room left and a void in the only suit Opener has bid naturally doesn't seem right.

[nige1]

(duplicate post deleted)

[nige1]

cnszsun, on Jul 8 2007, 09:32 AM, said:

Dealer: North Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠ AKJ10xxx ♥ xx ♦ x ♣ A10x ♠   ♥ AKxx ♦ AJx ♣ KQJxxx

1♠-2♣-(2♦) 3♠-4♣ 4♦-4♥ 4♠-6NT

Opponents bid only once, 2♦.
6♠ or 7♣ make, but 6NT have no chance after ♦ lead.
After 4♠, south was thinking of bidding 5NT (pick a slam), but they have never discussed this, so he gived it up. Supposing you don't have this tool, pls make your comments.

IMO North's bidding is OK except that he might have bid 5♣ rather than 4♠, even although it is an overbid IMO.

South deserves more of the blame although he had a difficult bid over 4♠ because 4N might well be natural. IMO he could try 5♦, 5♥, 5N (pick a slam) or 6♠ rather then 6N. Even the hoggish 6♣ would have been be more successful.

IMO 5♦ stands out if the earlier 4♦ could agree ♣

[mike777]

cnszsun, on Jul 8 2007, 09:32 AM, said:

<!-- NORTHSOUTH begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AKJ10xxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> A10x </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td>  </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> AKxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AJx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> KQJxxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td> 1♠-2♣-(2♦)
3♠-4♣
4♦-4♥
4♠-6NT </td> </tr> </table><!-- NORTHSOUTH end -->

Opponents bid only once, 2♦.
6♠ or 7♣ make, but 6NT have no chance after ♦ lead.
After 4♠, south was thinking of bidding 5NT (pick a slam), but they have never discussed this, so he gived it up. Supposing you don't have this tool, pls make your comments.

Excellent example hand of a very long, decades old, running debate.
Should North jump to 3s showing a great playing dist. hand despite a lack of Hcp and no known fit. I assume 2c was 100% game force.

Regardless of which side of that debate you prefer, with my stiff D and and 3 excellent clubs perhaps I can start this hand with 2 spades and try and keep the bidding low?

I will mark it 66% to north for 3s and 33% to south for 6nt, 1% rub of the green.

[cnszsun]

nige1, on Jul 9 2007, 03:51 AM, said:

IMO North's bidding is OK except that he might have bid

• 4♣ because it is clearer then 4♦
  
  
• 5♣ rather than 4♠, even although it is an overbid IMO.

South deserves more of the blame although he had a difficult bid over 4♠ because 4N might well be natural. IMO he could try 5♦, 5♥,  5N (pick a slam) or 6♠ rather then 6N. Even the hoggish 6♣ would have been be more successful.

IMO 5♦ stands out if the earlier 4♦ could agree ♣

In my mind, 6NT is clear not a good bid, But the question is how to understand the calls made perviously. Even if south can bid 5♦ or 5♥ now to delay the decision, he will need to know what's going on finally. That's why i prefer 5NT if it's pick a slam.
Some quesitons i want to know are:
1. Is 4♣ natural or cuebid in support of ♥?
2. What's 4♦?
3. At any time, north showed his ♣ fit or did he get that chance?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

seeing both hands, I dont like 3S,
but there are certainly hands out
there for which 3S will work, so...
And I have to see both hands to see
if i like the bid or not.

The main problem is, that 4D was
meant by North as a cue agreeing
clubs, which it is.
But South did not take it as cue
(else 6NT makes no sense at all).

Over 3S, South could have set spades
as trumps, only if he bids 3NT or 4C
spades are not set, but he did not.
If North wants to insist on spades, he
has to bid 4S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: In another thread I wrote, that the meaning
of 4C depends on (not) playing strong jump shifts,
the given hands is a good example why it probably
should not.

[nige1]

P_Marlowe, on Jul 9 2007, 12:52 AM, said:

seeing both hands, I dont like 3S,
but there are certainly hands out
there for which 3S will work, so...
And I have to see both hands to see
if i like the bid or not.

IMO, in a game-forcing auction, a non game jump rebid like 3♠ should have one of 2 purposes...

• 1. To paint a specific picture, for example a solid suit or
  
• 2. To show that partner's last bid improved your hand (here, because of the ♣ fit).

I prefer the 2nd interpretation, so I like the 3♠ bid in the given auction

[pclayton]

As usual, Justin focuses on the main problem - 4S. 4N is so painfully obvious. 4S boxed South who bid what he thought he could make.

Sure, south can go slower but the auction now becomes awkward.

[Fluffy]

3♠ means we play in spades even if you have a void. It is not best on tis auction.

4♣ is awful bid, you cannot cue kings opposite a (7)8+ card suit.

6NT was ugh....