[the hog]

You hold
AQ AKxx xx QJxxx

1S (P) 2C ( 2D)
3C (3D) 3H (4D)
4S (P) ?

Systemically 3C should be 15+, else on this auction pd could bid 2S to show 6 cards or pass to show no bid to make - iow not 4H not 15+ with C, not 6 good S. The 3H bid was game forcing.

What do you bid now?

[hrothgar]

I lean toward 5♠.

This should ask about a Diamond control...

[Chamaco]

What is 4NT here ?
-Generic Ace ask
- RKCB (for which suit, if so?)
- Last Train for clubs
- other

[1eyedjack]

Chamaco

Is 4NT ever used for LTTC? Just asking (I don't know).

[the hog]

5S would say bid 6 with 2 hons. I don't think pd has 2D here Richard, a stiff D is pretty well marked.

Re 4N. Well I assume this is RKC with S agreed.

[Chamaco]

1eyedjack, on Oct 3 2004, 12:22 PM, said:

Chamaco

Is 4NT ever used for LTTC?  Just asking (I don't know).

Some people do use it with a minor agreed (especially clubs), for such kind of situations (a problem suit where there has been no space for cuebids).

The use of 4NT as a "sort of" LTTC dates back to Chiaradia, in the 50s in the cuebidding style of the Neapolitan Club.
In his style (still used by many in Italy), a non-jump to 4NT during a cue sequence is never Ace ask(even when trumps is a major suit), and can have various meanings according to the sequence (some of them analogous to "serious 3NT", others to LTTC, others to 1st/2nd round control in last suit cuebid by pard).
----------------------------


Anyway I was just asking Ron which approach he uses

[Flame]

hrothgar, on Oct 3 2004, 07:17 AM, said:

I lean toward 5♠.

This should ask about a Diamond control...

I agree.
True partner rate to have a single but its not sure, and 5sp will make it harder for us to get to 7, but still my choice.

[Chamaco]

The_Hog, on Oct 3 2004, 12:22 PM, said:

5S would say bid 6 with 2 hons. I don't think pd has 2D here Richard, a stiff D is pretty well marked.

Ron,
is it not possible that opener has something like the following hand ?

KJT9xx - QJx- Qx - AKx

[inquiry]

The_Hog, on Oct 3 2004, 08:22 AM, said:

5S would say bid 6 with 2 hons. I don't think pd has 2D here Richard, a stiff D is pretty well marked.

Re 4N. Well I assume this is RKC with S agreed.

Why is partner marked with a singleton diamond? Certainly not because of the opponents bidding. They don't sound like a pair with a 5-5 fit (3D underbid) or 6-4 fit (4D underbid).

What about partner's bidding? Big diamond fit and six spades, might he not bid 3D over 2D?

Assuming 2C was game force, and even if it was not, assume 3C raise made it game force, what about partner's 4S bid over 4D? With a slam try (aka a singleton diamond) wouldn't he make a forcing pass over 4D?

So I serious doubt rather on not partner is "marked with a singleton" and would like you to explain to me why. Also it is not entirely clear to me that 4NT would agree to spades, despite you wanting it to be. After all, clubs were supported, and then you bid hearts. You don't have to have adequate two card support.

What do you think the lack of a forcing pass over 4D means?

[the hog]

Ben, in view of partner's 4S bid I think you have to give him KJTxxx as an absolute min - agreed? Possibly even 7.

To be honest I don't know what 4N would mean in this auction; I BELIEVE it is kc for S, but I admit that I do like Mauro's suggestion as a sort of "Last Train" a lot.

The lack of a fp pass suggests to me that pd definitely wants to play a suit contract - S or C. It is this bid together with the opp's bidding - they are pretty sound opps - that strongly suggest a 10 card fit. I doubt they would bid 2D in a strong auction here on a 5 carder, and then bid 4D over a 3D raise. Incidentally at this vul - we are, they aren't - I would have bid 3D with the Sth hand.

Actually I believe my pd bid his hand very badly. Here is the full hand.

---

I much prefer
1S (P) 2C (2D)
4D

As a start to the auction. This would have shown a min hand with good 4 card support and a splinter. Note that pd did not have his "extras". I also think his 4S bid on this suit was barbaric.

Ron

[inquiry]

I'm not so sure here. I think 4S was a cue-bid in support of spades, I think 4NT is RKCB for clubs, and I think 3HE was cue-bid. I also think that i would probably bid 3D over 2D with west hand (4D is ok, but, i want to try to conserve spade). This is a great hand opposite a 2club call despite the low hcp (ZAR count 33 in support).

Over 4D, i would now make a forcing pass, and when partner doubles I will cue-bid 4S, suggesting invite slam with diamond control.

Ben

[luke warm]

at the moment i'm trying to learn a system that uses intermediate (11+ - 15+) 2 bids... i'm not convinced, philosophically, how good this is gonna work out, but i have been looking at suitable hands to see how the bidding would go... a question i have on the original bidding is, instead of 3H over 3D, why not just bid 4C as rkc for clubs?

btw, in the system i'm learning, the bidding is 2S (p) 3C (p) and then 4C again as rkc...

[gabika73]

I agree with 5♠ being a Lackwood with 2 diamond loosers.

I like it pretty much, and it has worked in my partnerships to play a voluntary 5M as Lackwood if:
- opponents have bid a suit, and we have not shown control in that suit, or
- there is exactly one unbid suit in our side.

There are so many ways to ask for missing honor in trump suit (KeyCard ask, with voidwood, if appropriate), that you should not need another bid. On the other hand, it can be of great use with these types of hand.

So, clear 5♠, and partner will raise to 6 with his singleton.

[tlgoodwin]

[QUOTE]

Lukewarm, you may be familiar with a theoretical argument for the kind of two-bids you are trying out. The argument was set out in Jean-Rene Vernes' "La Majeure D'Abord," a relay system published in about 1973. Vernes' contention was that if you open two of a suit on a six-card suit, and you have less in high-cards than a normal one-bid, you make enemy intervention too attractive: your six-card suit gives them a lot of "total-tricks" protection, and you don't have enough in high-cards to make up for that. Vernes proposed a range of about 12-15 HCP for a six-card-suit two-bid, arguing that this tends to reestablish equilibrium, giving your side enough defense to make enemy intervention a lot more hazardous. Since many hands with 10-12 HCP and six-card suits qualify for sound one-bids, Vernes' suggestion was that a "weak" two-bid should be stronger, not weaker, than a minimum one-bid.

For what it is worth, TimG and I have been playing Vernes-style two-bids for several years (not that we play a lot), with results that we have found to be quite satisfactory. (If only the rest of our system worked as well . . . .) I don't keep records, but I can say that we have had a number of game swings by bidding 2M-4M-P while they were bidding 1M-1NT-2M-P at the other table.

T.L.Goodwin

[1eyedjack]

tlgoodwin, on Oct 4 2004, 03:59 PM, said:

we have had a number of game swings by bidding 2M-4M-P while they were bidding 1M-1NT-2M-P at the other table.

That particular problem does not happen too much in my partnership, because we play:
1S-1N-2D = 6+S
1H-1S-2C = 6+H (1S = Kaplan inversion/Granville)

This gives responder an opportunity to choose one of 2 steps in rebid without committing beyond 2M, that can be used to split responder's ranges.

Of course, there has to be a price to pay, for using up the bids in this manner. A price worth paying, in my opinion, but a positive price even so.