[Edmunte1]

Scoring: IMP

---

S ----- W ------ N ------ E
1♣-----3♦------3♥------pas
3NT ---pas --- 4♠ ----- pas
6NT

Please comment this bidding and explain your other choices. What was the worst call in your opinion?

[jtfanclub]

Um, what's the problem, exactly?

I take it that the bid doesn't make? East had the ace of clubs? The squeeze in the black suits doesn't work when you run the hearts?

[awm]

1♣, 3♥ are normal.

3NT is kind of an underbid; partner's shown game values opposite a 12-14 notrump and opener has 18. But this is sort of an awkward hand; you can't really force to slam and it's not clear what your various calls mean. If 4NT is natural that would be a good bid.

4♠ is fine, and really should show this type of hand. With 4♠/5♥ I would just pass or (if extras) raise 3NT to 4NT.

Opener needs to consider that 6♥ may be the best spot; partner is very likely 5-6 on the bidding (maybe 4-6, certainly not 5-5 which would bid ♠ first or 4-5 which would pass or raise NT). I like 6♥ instead of 6NT by opener; responder will know this is unlikely to be three-card support given the original 3NT call.

[mike777]

Edmunte1, on Jul 11 2007, 04:39 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

S ----- W ------ N ------ E
1♣-----3♦------3♥------pas
3NT ---pas --- 4♠ ----- pas
6NT

Please comment this bidding and explain your other choices. What was the worst call in your opinion?

Strongly prefer 4d by south and not 3nt.
North can rkc for hearts now me thinks.

[foo]

Agree with Mike777. S should know We rate to have 5 level safety.

[pbleighton]

Quote

1♣, 3♥ are normal.

3NT is kind of an underbid; partner's shown game values opposite a 12-14 notrump and opener has 18. But this is sort of an awkward hand; you can't really force to slam and it's not clear what your various calls mean. If 4NT is natural that would be a good bid.

4♠ is fine, and really should show this type of hand. With 4♠/5♥ I would just pass or (if extras) raise 3NT to 4NT.

Opener needs to consider that 6♥ may be the best spot; partner is very likely 5-6 on the bidding (maybe 4-6, certainly not 5-5 which would bid ♠ first or 4-5 which would pass or raise NT). I like 6♥ instead of 6NT by opener; responder will know this is unlikely to be three-card support given the original 3NT call.

I agree with Adam.

Peter

[Fluffy]

it is close between 3NT and 6NT .

My options on the order I think its best:

Options over 3♦: 3♥, 3♠, 4♦ (undiscussed for most, I'd take it right only because I have few major cards)


Options over 3♥: 4♦, 4♥, 3NT. Too strong for 3NT, ♠xx even worse.

Options over 3NT: 4♥, pass, 4♠ I don't like 4♠, too weak for that, If going to show both majors I'd rather bid 3♠ before.

Options over 4♠: 6♥, 4NT, 6NT, 5♦, 5♥. At first I though 6NT wasn't even an option, but thinking more deeply it saves the day on several specific layouts protecting the lead or ruffs.

[awm]

How do people play 4♦ by opener over 3♥? I've usually played this as a strong raise to 4♥, encouraging partner to bid on with a suitable hand. Evidently those people advocating this bid have a different meaning in mind (or do they really want to raise hearts with AQ tight and three possible diamond stops?)

I'm sure that if 4♦ shows "18-19 balanced with a diamond stop and no real fit" then it's the right bid with this hand. But it seems suspiciously like one of those "blame transfer" cuebids that shows every awkward hand and it's partner's fault if you end somewhere silly.....

[Fluffy]

awm, on Jul 13 2007, 12:35 AM, said:

Evidently those people advocating this bid have a different meaning in mind (or do they really want to raise hearts with AQ tight and three possible diamond stops?)

I need a fit to try for slam, and hearts is probably the best one for it (easiest to stablish at least). KJxxx is like the minimum suit (Maybe K10xxx) to be bid at the 3 level so there is no problem.

If after cuebids, blackwood and stuff I decide to stop in 6NT/7NT that's another issue (sadly stoppoing in 4/5NT is not possible).

[Codo]

1 Club was fine.

I had prefered 4 Diamond to 3 Heart, but this bid was fine too- and should have been more successful then 4 Diamond.
3 NT is a underbid but so much strength and length in their suit makes it it difficult to bid more.
4 Spade was fine.
6 NT was not good. If I want to play slam I surely should show my great heart support, so 6 Heart is better. Pd will correct to 6 NT if he wishs to.
I already denied three Hearts, so I should have at least Hx in trump and he can judge according to this assumption.

[ArtK78]

Everything is fine up to 3NT.

3NT is wrong for two reasons. First, the hand is too good. Second, where are the spades? You have a small doubleton spade - this is a warning.

I would bid 4D. AQ of hearts should be sufficient support on this auction. We will eventually get to 6H.

After 3NT and 4S, 6NT was just a silly bid at IMPs. You cannot count 12 tricks, and partner is showing at least 5-6 distribution (he would pass 3NT with 4-5, and he would bid spades first with 5-5). 6H has to be a better contract than 6NT, even though the lead is coming through the diamonds. The only possible exception is if partner is 5-6-2-0, in which case the opening leader may not have a diamond to lead.

[mikeh]

I like both of Adam's posts.

My style would be that 4♦ agrees ♥s...altho I suppose I might have self-sufficient clubs and a monster...but it is far more likely that I have a hand that is too good to simply bid 4♥..so I think that is how partner is supposed to treat the cue-bid in terms of his next call.

I also agree with the suggestion that, on this hand, the cuebid is not unreasonable: AQ is pretty fair support for a suit that could be bid at the 3-level.

However, the lead will be coming through my hand, and my hand is not as powerful as its point count suggested when I sorted it, so I have great sympathy for 3N. After all, we all know that partner was under pressure and may have stretched his 3♥ call.

After 4♠, the hand belongs in ♥s and the problem is 'how to undo' the limits suggested by the 3N call.

5♦ now would agree spades, so that is out.

5♥ is just a preference, altho an odd bid, frankly (most hands not liking spades would bid 4N or, if 3N were based on long, solid clubs and a single diamond stop, maybe 5♣).

So 6♥ seems right...

[jtfanclub]

mikeh, on Jul 13 2007, 10:18 AM, said:

So 6♥ seems right...

I honestly don't understand you guys. Maybe it's because I'm not an expert.

Why do you want to play it in 6 hearts? It should be obvious that after the mandatory opening diamond lead, you're going to end up entryless outside of trumps. If you draw trump, you're going to end up having to play spades, where you lose probably 2 tricks to go with the clubs. I have no idea where your 12th trick is coming from in a heart contract. You're praying for a 3-2 heart break and ruffing a spade? You still need 4-3 clubs to have a hope, and I'm still not sure it's any good.

For that matter, the three diamond bid implies 7 diamonds. If West also has the ace of clubs, how do you intend to prevent the opponents from getting an uppercut even if everything breaks well?

On the other hand, if I'm playing 6NT and they lead diamonds around to the AQ, I have 12 tricks by brute force, with no chance of a club ruff (6 hearts, 2 spades, 2 diamonds, 2 clubs). If West has the ace of clubs, then I can set up a squeeze while keeping my diamond entry. This seems like much better odds to me than hoping that everything splits after an auction like this one.

[mikeh]

jtfanclub, on Jul 13 2007, 10:50 AM, said:

mikeh, on Jul 13 2007, 10:18 AM, said:

So 6♥ seems right...

I honestly don't understand you guys. Maybe it's because I'm not an expert.

Why do you want to play it in 6 hearts? It should be obvious that after the mandatory opening diamond lead, you're going to end up entryless outside of trumps. If you draw trump, you're going to end up having to play spades, where you lose probably 2 tricks to go with the clubs. I have no idea where your 12th trick is coming from in a heart contract. You're praying for a 3-2 heart break and ruffing a spade? You still need 4-3 clubs to have a hope, and I'm still not sure it's any good.

For that matter, the three diamond bid implies 7 diamonds. If West also has the ace of clubs, how do you intend to prevent the opponents from getting an uppercut even if everything breaks well?

On the other hand, if I'm playing 6NT and they lead diamonds around to the AQ, I have 12 tricks by brute force, with no chance of a club ruff (6 hearts, 2 spades, 2 diamonds, 2 clubs). If West has the ace of clubs, then I can set up a squeeze while keeping my diamond entry. This seems like much better odds to me than hoping that everything splits after an auction like this one.

On the actual hand, you may be correct, but I do try to answer based on the auction and the hand that had the decisions to make.

6N is no thing of beauty. Neither is 6♥, for the reasons you point out.

But make North's hand AKxxx KJ109xx x x and I like 6♥ a lot more than I like 6N, yet the bidding would be the same. Also, if North were 5=6=0=2, while 6N is pretty good, now, 6♥ will be acceptable as well.

The point is that, as South, once partner suggests 5=6 or more in the majors, I think that the probabilty is that 6♥ will usually be as good or better than 6N.

Not always, but we are always going to be guessing here, to some degree, and my guess would be to play ♥s when partner invited me to do so and I hold an undisclosed AQ support.

[foo]

awm, on Jul 12 2007, 07:35 PM, said:

How do people play 4♦ by opener over 3♥? I've usually played this as a strong raise to 4♥, encouraging partner to bid on with a suitable hand. Evidently those people advocating this bid have a different meaning in mind (or do they really want to raise hearts with AQ tight and three possible diamond stops?)

I'm sure that if 4♦ shows "18-19 balanced with a diamond stop and no real fit" then it's the right bid with this hand. But it seems suspiciously like one of those "blame transfer" cuebids that shows every awkward hand and it's partner's fault if you end somewhere silly.....

Responder rates to be 56 in S+H on this auction. With 45, many responder's would make a Neg X followed by a H rebid.

Thus those bidding 4D are effectively cuebidding D values in a "strong raise to 4H" since they "know" that We have a 62 H fit.

[jtfanclub]

mikeh, on Jul 13 2007, 11:08 AM, said:

6N is no thing of beauty. Neither is 6♥, for the reasons you point out.

The point is that, as South, once partner suggests 5=6 or more in the majors, I think that the probabilty is that 6♥ will usually be as good or better than 6N.

Not always, but we are always going to be guessing here, to some degree, and my guess would be to play ♥s when partner invited me to do so and I hold an undisclosed AQ support.

But it's not just a question of whether 6♥ or 6NT is better, in my mind. The problem is, what one wants to do is declare 6♥, and that's impossible.

You can see that, thanks to the KQJxx in clubs, that it's likely that the slam is going to be decided on that diamond entry, no matter which slam you choose. If you declare it, the diamond entry is safe, unless the opponents like committing suicide. If your partner declares it, that diamond entry is gone in a flash.

I think not enough weight is given to the 3♦ bid. If that's really a 7 (or 8!) card diamond suit, things are going to be splitting horribly. Like spades splitting 5-1, which is lethal in 6 hearts but is actually a good thing in 6NT. Without the diamond bid, I think the auctions listed are good ones. With that diamond warning light flashing, I like the original auction better.

[awm]

foo, on Jul 13 2007, 11:14 AM, said:

Responder rates to be 56 in S+H on this auction. With 45, many responder's would make a Neg X followed by a H rebid.

Thus those bidding 4D are effectively cuebidding D values in a "strong raise to 4H" since they "know" that We have a 62 H fit.

The proposd 4♦ bid is (obviously) prior to the 4♠ call. At this point in the auction responder hasn't shown any spades at all. I'm sure that 3♥ is a normal bid on 2524 shape, or 3514 shape. It doesn't promise six hearts by any means.

After the 4♠ call, I agree that six hearts are guaranteed, but I don't see much reason for bidding 4♦ after partner bids 4♠.

[foo]

awm, on Jul 13 2007, 12:24 PM, said:

foo, on Jul 13 2007, 11:14 AM, said:

Responder rates to be 56 in S+H on this auction.  With 45, many responder's would make a Neg X followed by a H rebid.

Thus those bidding 4D are effectively cuebidding D values in a "strong raise to 4H" since they "know" that We have a 62 H fit.

The proposd 4♦ bid is (obviously) prior to the 4♠ call. At this point in the auction responder hasn't shown any spades at all. I'm sure that 3♥ is a normal bid on 2524 shape, or 3514 shape. It doesn't promise six hearts by any means.

After the 4♠ call, I agree that six hearts are guaranteed, but I don't see much reason for bidding 4♦ after partner bids 4♠.

As the younger crowd says, "D'oh!" My Bad.

After 1C-(3D)-3H;??

Opener's choices are all a bit unpalatable.

3N seems like an underbid when opener is looking at 19 after responder has shown 12+.

4N is ~ right on values, but is awefully unilateral.

Since responder may very well have 6+H for their 3H response, and since if push comes to shove playing H's in the 52 may very well be better (not because of the ♠ hole. Responder has to have ♠ values for their bidding.), I think 4D is the least of evils as opener's next call.
The intent is that opener is gambling a bit that Responder has 6+H.


Your other options are
b= bid 3N (praying it won't be passed) and then 5H or 6H over 4S.
c= bid 4N. pd will probably take this as Asking, not Quantitative.