[fromageGB]

gnasher, on 2013-May-16, 10:54, said:

I think introducing a minor should show slam interest. There isn't enough space to cater for the small set of hands where responder doesn't have slam interest, doesn't want to play 3NT, and thinks that 5♦ will play better than a 5-2 heart fit.

Surely this depends how you play (natural methods) the minor rebid after a transfer to the major. If 4m is perhaps a slam try, perhaps a game escape, isn't a 5m rebid, after whatever opener says, to play?

[gnasher]

fromageGB, on 2013-May-17, 07:25, said:

Surely this depends how you play (natural methods) the minor rebid after a transfer to the major. If 4m is perhaps a slam try, perhaps a game escape, isn't a 5m rebid, after whatever opener says, to play?

You can play it that way if you like. As I said, I think 4m should show slam interest, so in my world opener is allowed to raise responder's attempted sign-off.

I'm a bit surprised that two people have now suggested that 4m might not be a slam-try - I'd have guessed that playing it as a slam-try was almost universal.

[jallerton]

JLOGIC, on 2013-May-17, 00:30, said:

What if you have a good hand for hearts? Is 4H forcing? If so not being able to stop in 4H seems like a big loss. If not, you have no bids for good or really good heart hands.

I thought someone might say that! It's not very scientific but, as a practical matter, most very good hands for hearts will have 4-card ♥ support and will have broken the transfer on the previous round. Meanwhile, most very bad hands for hearts will be those with values stuffed in the black suits; these hands are usually best off hiding the 3-card support and bidding a natural and discouraging 4NT. If, exceptionally, Opener has a hand with 3-card support with all working cards, he can always jump to 5♥.

[FrancesHinden]

jallerton, on 2013-May-16, 23:53, said:

This doesn't fit in with Gnasher's 'minimise information leakage' scheme where 2NT-3NT is non-forcing with 4 spades.

I thought of replying to say "only from one side of the table" but that would be cruel, so I didn't.

[fromageGB]

gnasher, on 2013-May-17, 08:05, said:

You can play it that way if you like. As I said, I think 4m should show slam interest, so in my world opener is allowed to raise responder's attempted sign-off.

I'm a bit surprised that two people have now suggested that 4m might not be a slam-try - I'd have guessed that playing it as a slam-try was almost universal.

If you have a slam try, by definition that means if you decide not to, you can play in 5m. It seems strange that you would deny the ability to play in 5m when responder is a zero count 5008 shape, to quote a common hand type.

[gnasher]

fromageGB, on 2013-May-18, 01:55, said:

If you have a slam try, by definition that means if you decide not to, you can play in 5m. It seems strange that you would deny the ability to play in 5m when responder is a zero count 5008 shape, to quote a common hand type.

Consider these two approaches:
(1) 4♦ is a slam try. With slam interest, responder can:
- Sign off if opener shows no interest, but drive slam if he shows interest.
- Sign off even if opener shows some interest, leaving opener to bid slam if he is sufficiently suitable.
- Drive slam

(2) 4♦ is either a slam try or a hand looking for the best game. With slam interest, responder can:
- Sign off if opener shows no interest, but drive slam if he shows interest.
- Drive slam

Obviously (1) is more accurate in the slam zone than (2), because it splits responder's range into three slam-tries, rather than two slam-tries and a best-game hand. I think this justifies the loss of accuracy on hands where responder has no slam interest (if such hands exist). Apparently you don't. That's OK with me.

In fact, of course, there isn't a firm line between "slam try" and "best-game hand". A hand where the best game is 5♦ opposite an average 2NT opener is likely to make 6♦ opposite a very suitable hand. Even your 5-8 Yarborough would make a grand slam opposite the right 16-count (or 11, on a good day). So presumably your sign-off in 5♦ isn't final anyway, it's just more of a sign-off than my 5♦ bid.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-May-15, 12:58, said:

Responder should have at least a 5-5 to go past 3NT ... and wants to play in one of these suits:
After 4♦:
??
4♥ = agree ♥
and the next 4 steps can be ( EDIT :) 6-Ace RKC-showing agreeing ♦:

Opener is in the narrow range of 20-21, so Responder remains Captain.

If ♥ agreed, then Responder can either pass, bid 4S = RKC or 4NT = Exclusion ( ♠-void )... EDIT: again, use 6 Ace-RKC .

If ♦ agreed ( via the RKC-showing ) , then Responder can place the contract or ask for the ♦Q ( next step ) or K-ask ( 2nd-step ).

Here's a hand where Responder certainly is slammish opposite a 2NT open, but I think Responder still should have at least a 5-5 to guarantee at least an 8 card fit in one of the two red suits:

---

2NT - 3D!
3H - 4D
??
.. 4H = agrees ♥
Next 4 steps are 6 Ace RKC-showing agreeing ♦ ( implies only 2 cards ♥ )
.. 4S = 0/3
..4NT = 1/4
.. 5C = 2 - ♦Q
.. 5D = 2 + ♦Q ( ♥Q is rolled into the K-ask ; specific replies )
After:
4S ( 0/3 )
...... - 5D to play; missing 2 of 6 key cards

[FrancesHinden]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-May-18, 07:24, said:

Here's a hand where Responder certainly is slammish opposite a 2NT open, but I think Responder still should have at least a 5-5 to guarantee at least an 8 card fit in one of the two red suits:

I'm afraid you are basically in a minority of one here.
How do you expect to bid

AKxx
Kx
AQxx
Axx

opposite

xx
AQxxx
KJxx
xx
?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

FrancesHinden, on 2013-May-18, 09:58, said:

I'm afraid you are basically in a minority of one here.
How do you expect to bid

AKxx
Kx
AQxx
Axx

opposite

xx
AQxxx
KJxx
xx
?

I'm afraid I'd just end up in 3NT ( I notice only 30 combined hcp too ) eventho it looks like 6D might make :
2NT - 3D!
3H - 3NT

Minority or not, it just doesn't seem prudent to go past 3NT with a 4D bid on only a 4 card suit.

What if Opener is:
AKxx
Kx
Axxx
AQx

[gnasher]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-May-18, 13:29, said:

What if Opener is:
AKxx
Kx
Axxx
AQx

We play in 6♦. Even though the tranfer response means we've wrong-sided 6♦, it's still a reasonable contract. On a club lead it's around 50%, but some of the time they'll lead a spade.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

What about this one for Opener :
AKxx
Kx
Axx
AQxx

opposite
xx
AQxxx
KJxx
xx

[JLOGIC]

Opener would sign off in 4N as they have no fit and both black suits double stopped.

If you played what I suggested opener would sign off in 4H.

Of course no method is going to be perfect on every deal though, no matter what methods you play you might miss some good ones and get to some bad ones. The idea of this thread is to suggest methods that you think maximize your chance of gettingto good ones and staying out ofbad ones.

[FrancesHinden]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2013-May-18, 13:29, said:

Minority or not, it just doesn't seem prudent to go past 3NT with a 4D bid on only a 4 card suit.

I thought I was being kind by not giving a 20-point hand opposite where 7D just needs hearts 4-2 and diamonds not 4-0 e.g. AKx Kx AQxxx Axx.

You simply can't say responder must have a 5-card suit to go past 3NT.
Let's give responder some more high cards

AQx
Ax
KJxx
AQxx

Kx
KQxxx
AQxx
xx

7D by opener is a huge spot, and 7D by responder is good. responder has got a slam force opposite a 2NT opening bid, but how are you planning to bid responder's hand?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

After a transfer, then 5NT = choice of small slam .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
But how would you bid it ? ( I assume using your transfer method ) ?

[cherdano]

Btw, I think all these keycard asks should be 6-keycard BW (while asking for the trump queen of the agreed suit). You always have to play at least two rounds of responder's side suit before you can start ruffing. Yes you miss slams on one of two finesses, I can live with that...

The queen of the 2nd suit can then be treated as a king in subsequent asks.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

cherdano, on 2013-May-19, 08:44, said:

Btw, I think all these keycard asks should be 6-keycard BW (while asking for the trump queen of the agreed suit). You always have to play at least two rounds of responder's side suit before you can start ruffing. Yes you miss slams on one of two finesses, I can live with that...

The queen of the 2nd suit can then be treated as a king in subsequent asks.

a la my post # 47 ...( 6 Ace-RKC ... )

[PhilKing]

cherdano, on 2013-May-19, 08:44, said:

Btw, I think all these keycard asks should be 6-keycard BW (while asking for the trump queen of the agreed suit). You always have to play at least two rounds of responder's side suit before you can start ruffing. Yes you miss slams on one of two finesses, I can live with that...

The queen of the 2nd suit can then be treated as a king in subsequent asks.

FWIW I don't think that is technically correct.

If opener holds:

♠AQx
♥Axx
♦KQJTx
♣Ax

When partner transfers to spades and bids 4♣, he wants to key card for spades only, since we may make seven opposite ♠KJxxx ♥Kx ♦Ax ♣QTxx. Key card for the minor by either player, or major suit RKC by responder should be 6 ace (in my case I make auto responses of 5♥ plus), because we rarely have enough discards not to need both kings.

[aguahombre]

PhilKing, on 2013-May-19, 13:14, said:

FWIW I don't think that is technically correct.

If opener holds:

♠AQx
♥Axx
♦KQJTx
♣Ax

When partner transfers to spades and bids 4♣, he wants to key card for spades only, since we may make seven opposite ♠KJxxx ♥Kx ♦Ax ♣QTxx. Key card for the minor by either player, or major suit RKC by responder should be 6 ace (in my case I make auto responses of 5♥ plus), because we rarely have enough discards not to need both kings.

I don't understand how this conflicts. It is responder who will Keycard when opener bids 4M. The Major suit queen will be shown or denied, and the club king will be shown or denied.

[PhilKing]

aguahombre, on 2013-May-19, 13:24, said:

I don't understand how this conflicts. It is responder who will Keycard when opener bids 4M. The Major suit queen will be shown or denied, and the club king will be shown or denied.

It doesn't in that sequence, but I play similar to the JLogic way whereby 4♠ just shows almost all minimums and may have two spades, and 4M+1 is RKCB for the major with 5 key cards (for him it is RKC for the minor and should be 6 ace).

You can't get me to sign off with that hand!

[aguahombre]

Yes, any time one side has shown balanced, and the other side two suits, there are 6 keys.

I just don't show a major fit without one on the chance partner wants to key for the major. So I gobble up 4NT with 2-3 in the two suits. Responder can "answer" of the 6 keys for the minor if she wants to over 4NT.