[kenrexford]

mgoetze, on 2011-October-03, 01:14, said:

2254s are opened 1♦ in our system. However, rebidding 2♦ is certainly not the right move for us, 3♠ also shows 5 diamonds (because the only shape without 5 diamonds in 1♦ is 4441, which has no club support).

We haven't discussed whether 3♠ should show extras. It's something I'll think about. But 1♦-2♣-3♣ could also show just the 2254 shape.

Well, that seems RATHER important to the analysis. LOL Something perhaps that you should have mentioned.

But, even if you do include 2254 into the 1♦ opening (a style I have also played), then raising clubs seems wrong. By definition (I think now), your hand must have shortness with the sole exceptions being perhaps 2254 and 6+ diamonds. If your partner bids 2♣, you will often have a major when you do not have a club fit (and sometimes even when you do) to bid. If you do not have a major and do not have a club fit with shortness, you often have rebiddable diamonds. The sole exception is 2254. With that hand, you might bid 2NT or 3NT, or even rebid diamonds.

The ability to have 3♣ already show extras and shape seems hugely important when you have a pattern-limited opening like even an impurely unbalanced diamond.

[whereagles]

MrAce, on 2011-October-02, 22:32, said:

What u said doesnt add up as usual (...)

If it doesn't add up "as usual", why do you bother to reply?

[hotShot]

mgoetze, on 2011-October-02, 09:41, said:

---

A spade was lead to the ace and 3NT+3 brought in 32.5%. Who should have done more?

West could have 12 HCP and up to 8 loser, and opposite the possibility of this kind of junk, East has a GF. West should hear the slam bells ringing after that.
I'm not a 2/1 expert, but if 2♣ was GF why does West waste bidding space with a splinter? Both opponents have passed already, it's unlikely that they will reenter the auction again.
Actually the splinter tells opps that they (most likely) have a ♠ fit.
Would a 2♥ bid by West show ♥? East won't pass (he has forced to game), and his ♥ QT7 look much better than.
Isn't going slow after a GF a hint for extra strength?
1♦ (unbalanced) 2♣ (GF)
2♥ 2NT (♠ values)
leaving you with all of the 3 and 4 level to find out about slam.

[cloa513]

kenrexford, on 2011-October-02, 11:21, said:

IMO, both observations before mine have an errant analysis due to bot understanding the concept of a balanced 1♦ opening.

Without playing an unbalanced 1♦, Opener may feel obligated to make splinters on slightly lesser values than East would expect in this sequence. But, playing an unbalanced diamond approach, a simple raise already announces shortness. Hence,

1♦-2♣
3♣

This is a sequence where West is known to have club support and shortness. If East wants to know, he can bid 3♦ (presumably) and hear the shortness (whether the partnership bids shortness next or fragment -- either works).

when pener instead splinters himself, this shows EXTRAS and shortness. In other words, West shows by his 3♠ call a hand that using less effective methods would splinter and then fret over whether to bypass 3NT. One of the entire points of playing an unbalanced diamond is this very sequence.

So, now to East. East can obviously see that the spade K-Q are wasted horribly, but the sixth club and stiff diamond cannot be bad.

Therefore, I place the blame 100% with EAST, because of the SYSTEM.

Indeed, why can't 4NT be for such a hand- blackwood for minors makes no sense- good top clubs incl. ace and double cover on spades. If opener has only a singleton spade and is missing an ace then 5C can escaped to.

[mikeh]

I'm surprised no-one has pointed out that responder's problem here may have arisen in part because he placed opener with a stiff spade....thus he needed to have zero side losers to justify a slam.

I can see an argument that it can't cost to move over 3♠, but what does he bid, and how does the auction unfold? And it isn't always going to be possible (from responder's p.o.v.) to stop safely in 4N while 5♣ rates to fare poorly at mps.

As for West moving on......just how good a hand/suit does 2♣ promise? AQJ xxx xxx AKJx looks like 2♣ then 3N, doesn't it?

So I have sympathy for both players. I do think that raising 2♣ to 3♣ gets the partnership to slam, but by accident rather than by design....responder presumably bids 3♠ and opener doesn't bid 3N.

The fact that the OP got more than 30% suggests that most of the field had similar difficulties. If I had to blame anyone, it would be responder, but I think this is just one of those hands.....if you're 'on', you move over 3♠ and buy a great dummy.....if you're 'off', you bid 3N (and on different layouts, you do the reverse and regret it)


I understand why both hands are given.....when doing ATB, you have to post both, but it always brings out the same response from a small group of posters, who find blame so easy to assign. Give them both hands, and they bid like geniuses. Too bad for them that bridge isn't played that way

[xxhong]

All you need is something like CAKxxx to have an excellent 6C and a shot at 7C. So 3S then pass 3NT is clearly wrong.

mgoetze, on 2011-October-02, 09:41, said:

---

A spade was lead to the ace and 3NT+3 brought in 32.5%. Who should have done more?

[kenrexford]

xxhong, on 2011-October-03, 14:10, said:

All you need is something like CAKxxx to have an excellent 6C and a shot at 7C. So 3S then pass 3NT is clearly wrong.

How is that excellent? Odds favor an immediate club loser, and then you still have work to do in the side suits.

[xxhong]

Let me give you a very minimum hand: KQx xx xxx AKxxx, I want to play in 6C.
You need either C 2-2 or C3-1 but DK on. That's good enough for a small slam.

kenrexford, on 2011-October-03, 14:48, said:

How is that excellent? Odds favor an immediate club loser, and then you still have work to do in the side suits.

[kenrexford]

xxhong, on 2011-October-03, 16:50, said:

Let me give you a very minimum hand: KQx xx xxx AKxxx, I want to play in 6C.
You need either C 2-2 or C3-1 but DK on. That's good enough for a small slam.

OK, let me give you some hands as well.

1. KQxx-QJx-x-AJxxx
2. AJx-QJx-x-AJxxxx
3. Axx-QJx-xx-AQxxx

Both of these have serious risks at 4NT if Responder bows out after Opener enters the four-level. Adding in doubletons or tripletons in diamonds does nothing to increase the chance of 4NT making. Changing some shape does little to help.

On contrast, what does East need?

West's action of bidding 3♠ normally would show a minimum of at least 1354 shape, because with 1444 the apparent systemic opening is 1♣ ♣(per the original post). Hence, a minimum of a 10-card club fit is known. With the Ace and King, the club suit can already be deemed a relative favorite for a no-loser suit.

West's action of not simply raising clubs (which SHOULD should a minimum of 1354 shape as well, IMO) indicates a non-minimum, as that call already (IMO) should show a stiff major card, which can be shown via a 3♦ "relay." Opener surely is not calling his stiff Ace a splinter hand, so we can rule out the idea of that holding.

Opener has made a power splinter. He lacks any key cards in clubs. Will he make a power splinter with only one key card? Seems unlikely. Thus, he almost assuredly for this sequence has at least two Aces or at least one Ace and void in spades. Plus, he also should have control in the other suit. So, the worst comnceivable hand would have a void, heart Ace (but not the King), and not the diamond Ace (rather, the King at the top). With no honors in spades, and a power raise, what hand can he have where East cannot seee slam?

You will undoubtedly be able to show possible hands for Opener where 6♣ is odds-off. Fine. The question, though, is WHO ENTERS THE FOUR-LEVEL? East or West? In my opinion, this sequence calls for East taking the risk, because West already stated power and because East has the last decision before 3NT.

Think of it this way. Imagine distinct slam interests: low, mild, sound, strong, and assured.

Opener bids 3♣ with a stiff and low to mild slam values. If Responder can make slam opposite this, he goes forth. If he needs mild, he ventures past 3NT.
Opener bids 3♠ with sound and strong interest. If Responder can make slam opposite this, he goes forth. If he needs mild, he ventures past 3NT.
Opener blasts out with assured interest.

If you stack too much onto 3♠, you end up with 3♣ as low but 3♠ as mild to strong. Responder bumps if he needs sound, but Opener bumps with strong. The result is entering the four-level too freqently, IMO.

[MrAce]

whereagles, on 2011-October-03, 06:02, said:

If it doesn't add up "as usual", why do you bother to reply?

Good point.

[Lurpoa]

MrAce, on 2011-October-03, 17:53, said:

Good point.

Two good points
♥♥

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I looked at the auction, I looked at the hands, ... wtp?

Sry - the splinter is fine, depending on your agreement set, bidding
3C instead of 3S may well deny a splinter, showing a 5422 hand.
Bidding 3NT with KQ9 looks also obvious as well, and so does pass,
... after all opener did describe his hand pretty well, ok we have a
void instead of a single..

6C is fine / even cold, so what.

Playing IMPs, I think moving on is sensible, maybe even matadory, but
playing MP - if you move on, you basically commit yourself to 6C.

If you want to find this slam playing MP, you have to add science to
your agreement set, hopefully this science allowes you to stop in 3NT
as well.

With kind regards
Marlowe