[wank]

---

1♠-2♥-2♠-4♠

playing 2/1. 4♠ being picture. imps

[RunemPard]

100% South...

Axx in partner's suit
AKxxxx side suit...

Let's slow down a little and give partner a chance IMO.

3♠ from me w/ intent of bidding 4♥ over a minor cue.

Edit: Ok...maybe 80% South...only because North should understand that we must have something. Both minor As and the KQxxxx of spades. The 5 level does not seem that scary.

[aguahombre]

Entirely North (opener). Maybe the "picture" isn't perfect, but opposite a picture 4-5-2-2 slam must be close to cold. This one is the worst possible picture and seems to be about 65 percent on a diamond lead, and maybe a bit less on a club lead.

No further exploration after 4S, just six would be fine.

[rhm]

It seems to me that North does not know what a picture bid is. Apparently it is often confused with fast arrival.
Picture bids are not weak or minimum hands in context as fast arrival is.

It could have been worse: Give South instead

♠Axx ♥AKQxx ♦Qxx ♣xx

Rainer Herrmann

[han]

If I think about this auction I picture AQxx KQxxx xx xx, or KJxx AQJxx xx xx, perhaps with a side queen or jack somewhere. I do not picture AKxxxx, where a small doubleton is perfect to set up the suit. So, to my mind, south does not have a picture bid.

How can north know that south does not have AJxx KQxxx Qx xx? The 5-level looks safe, but unless partner has the AK of hearts slam will at most on a finesse. And I don't think that partner should have the AK of hearts.

So my blame goes entirely to south, but that's just because of how I understand a picture jump. Really this is not a suitable ATB question, it is a question of how to define the picture jump. Determining who is guilty is not a constructive way for dealing with this kind of problem.

By the way, another serious problem with the picture jump is that if I had Kxxxxx x AKx AKx and partner made this jump, I'd ask for keycards. When partner showed 2 without the queen, I'd bid 7S, expecting to claim on a non 3-0 spade split. For me a picture jump shows 4 trumps, not three.

[dake50]

If I think about this auction I picture AQxx KQxxx xx xx, or KJxx AQJxx xx xx, perhaps with a side queen or jack somewhere. I do not picture AKxxxx, where a small doubleton is perfect to set up the suit. So, to my mind, south does not have a picture bid.

***
Agree an agreement is needed but to my mind
AQxx KQxxx xx xx or KJxx AQJxx xx xx starts Jacoby 2NT.
2H, rebid jump 4S shows Axx with a good 6xH - just as bid.

[SteveMoe]

As North I'd be thinking 6♠s+5♥s + 2 minor aces = 12 as an indicator we are in the slam zone if pard has primes. As South I'd be thinking that my hand has primes and 3 Trumps in support, so I would bid 3♠ not 4. I think a picture bid should have 4 trumps. I am unclear whether this pair uses picture bids by unlimited hands or not.

If they do, then 100% to North.
If they don't then 60% North - RKB seems cheap here.

[han]

Picture bids to game by unlimited hands is ridiculous, perhaps you could have figured that out.

[rhm]

 han, on 2012-August-21, 02:17, said:

Picture bids to game by unlimited hands is ridiculous, perhaps you could have figured that out.

Why???
This was said for fast arrivals, where I agree, because you never know how strong partner is, who you have just preempted.
Accordingly I also disagree with your notion of "picture bids" as minimum hands unsuitable for slam.
For me a picture bid is a slam invitation missing first and second round controls in unbid suits and there are usually two of them.
This implies by simple logic I will have good controls in the bid suits. These hands are tough to describe otherwise. The five-level is per definition not safe.
Partner is encouraged to go to slam with controls, particularly when holding first round controls in both unbid suits.
The logical consequence is that with fast arrival hands (your examples) you do not jump to game.

I said already many have not grasped the concept of picture bids. You seem to be one of them.

Rainer Herrmann

[han]

 rhm, on 2012-August-21, 03:24, said:

I also disagree with your notion of "picture bids" as minimum hands unsuitable for slam.

To me a picture bid is a minimum hand but SUITABLE for slam. I don't see how this misunderstand could arise as I gave several examples of picture bids, and all were suitable for slam. To summarize, for me a picture bid shows:

An opening hand.
4-card support to at least one top honor, but not AK of trumps.
No control in one of the outside suits.
A 5-card side suit with exactly 2 of the 3 top honors.

[han]

I have never played fast arrival, but for most Dutch people it seems to mean the worst kind of 2/1 hands. Hands like

Kxx AJxxx Kxx Jx.

Now that is what I call slam unsuitable. I think those hands are far removed from the hands with which I jump to game.

[Phil]

 han, on 2012-August-21, 02:17, said:

Picture bids to game by unlimited hands is ridiculous, perhaps you could have figured that out.

Even in the Lawrence 2/1 book he says that a hand like:

AQJxx KJxx xx xx is fine as a picture jump but:

AKQxx KQxx xx xx is not.

So, "picture also means minimum".

Does it mean that the bid won't be made as frequently? Yes, but that's a good thing.

[han]

Lawrence to the rescue, thanks Phil!

[Vampyr]

I am not sure how easy it is in OP's methods to know when a bid is "fast arrival" and when it is a picture bid. It sounds pretty hard to me! In any case, I think that on this hand 2/1 GF was a loser. At our table South bid 3NT after 2♠. North did not move on, in spite of not having managed to limit his hand. Teammates who bid 3♠ instead of 2 found it a piece of cake.

[han]

Maybe I'm naive, but I think that if south just raises to 3S and north just shows serious slam interest, you would get to slam. Both decisions seem really clearcut.

[the hog]

100% North. South has shown this hand with the picture jump - good H, good to reasonable S and xx xx in the off suits. North lacks hand evaluation ability. Just read Rhm's post and entirely agree with that; if anything, south is a little light for the picture bid.

[wank]

well i was north. my idea of a picture bid was more akin to han's and that south's hand is too good in so much as his suit often won't need help to establish.

[kenrexford]

Dumb discussion. I find it funny to have a call like a picture bid subject to interpretation. It is supposed to be a picture. Hence, there must be an agreed definition. Without one, it is not a picture bid. Thus, every answer should be "what is your agreement?". Then, one could debate agreement merits, but not in a blame scenario. BTW, as I often do, I find Lawrence silly and tend instead to more of the style of picture described by rhm and hog. My own definition is very detailed in my cuebidding

[gnasher]

 Vampyr, on 2012-August-21, 17:07, said:

I am not sure how easy it is in OP's methods to know when a bid is "fast arrival" and when it is a picture bid. It sounds pretty hard to me!

It sounds like they knew the answer to that question. The question they had difficulties with was "What is a picture bid?"

[SteveMoe]

 han, on 2012-August-21, 02:17, said:

Picture bids to game by unlimited hands is ridiculous, perhaps you could have figured that out.

Mea culpa for ambiguous language - picture bids limit an otherwise unlimited hand. The details have already been posted. Agree Ken, Rainer, Hog. Thanks!

For other readers, Andrew Gumperz has a post on Gumps Tips Picture Bids. Check it out!