[Cyberyeti]

---

For us the club is 4+, but may not be for others. W will bid 3♦ if as seems likely it's sufficient.

The slam is great but with only fairly modest competition it seems quite tricky to bid with any certainty.

Looking for an auction in a natural-ish system that will start with 1♣.

[KingCovert]

Continue with: X, 3♦, 3♠, PASS, 4♣, 5♣, 6♣ ?

It's pretty gross, I'll admit... But, seems like it shouldn't really matter which cards partner holds for their 5♣ bid, they should all be good. No way partner can seriously be valuing something like the K♦. I wouldn't fault partner for having something like, K♥ and AJX♣ though.

I think, to some extent, you're always going to have to go to 6♣ on probability/prayers. Sometimes it'll be wrong, but, there's really no good opportunity to agree clubs and check for AK♣ and simultaneously find out about partner's spade length. Something has to give. Unless you had somewhat specialized agreements. I like playing Canape a lot, but, alas, that doesn't meet your requirements.

[Cyberyeti]

 KingCovert, on 2020-July-16, 12:42, said:

Continue with: X, 3♦, 3♠, PASS, 4♣, 5♣, 6♣ ?

It's pretty gross, I'll admit... But, seems like it shouldn't really matter which cards partner holds for their 5♣ bid, they should all be good. No way partner can seriously be valuing something like the K♦. I wouldn't fault partner for having something like, K♥ and AJX♣ though.

I think, to some extent, you're always going to have to go to 6♣ on probability/prayers. Sometimes it'll be wrong, but, there's really no good opportunity to agree clubs and check for AK♣ and simultaneously find out about partner's spade length. Something has to give. Unless you had somewhat specialized agreements. I like playing Canape a lot, but, alas, that doesn't meet your requirements.

What does X mean for you ? cards, hearts ? anything specific

[KingCovert]

 Cyberyeti, on 2020-July-16, 12:51, said:

What does X mean for you ? cards, hearts ? anything specific

Well, penalty would be somewhat silly here. So, I just figured, 4 hearts and no logical cue bid. I think the bidding of 4♣ over 3♠ tells the spade situation later.

EDIT: To be fair, if I'm not playing a Canape system, then I'd be playing 2/1 and I almost never can really have a penalty double after opening 1♣... So, in this sense, penalty seems stupid. But... I believe in your system, you could legitimately have a diamond holding.

[smerriman]

Double would be support for me; I would be bidding 2NT good/bad showing a long club suit. But I expect over 3♦ North would still bid 3♠, and South would raise to 4♠ and that would be it.

[Cyberyeti]

 KingCovert, on 2020-July-16, 13:12, said:

Well, penalty would be somewhat silly here. So, I just figured, 4 hearts and no logical cue bid. I think the bidding of 4♣ over 3♠ tells the spade situation later.

EDIT: To be fair, if I'm not playing a Canape system, then I'd be playing 2/1 and I almost never can really have a penalty double after opening 1♣... So, in this sense, penalty seems stupid. But... I believe in your system, you could legitimately have a diamond holding.

For us it's 4 hearts, as shown later some people play it as support, others just as values and nothing sensible to bid so not guaranteeing 4 hearts.

I suppose in abstract I could have a xx45 hand but not very often (we open 1♦ with 4-4 out of NT range), so would be a waste playing it as penalty.

[FelicityR]

Bidding combined 23 HCP super fit small slams doesn't come easy, even with the opponents not intervening. Precision in the hands of Meckstroth and Rodwell might get there but for us mere bridge mortals I really cannot see an easy path to 6♣. You can guess your way to 6♣, but anyone can do that and claim credit afterwards. Bidding it constructively to 6♣ is another matter.

[smerriman]

 KingCovert, on 2020-July-16, 12:42, said:

Continue with: X, 3♦, 3♠, PASS, 4♣, 5♣, 6♣ ?

Knowing your partner has a good 6 card spade suit, are you really going to prefer trying to sign off in 4♣, opposite a potential void, to raising with your singleton ace?

[Cyberyeti]

 FelicityR, on 2020-July-16, 16:06, said:

Bidding combined 23 HCP super fit small slams doesn't come easy, even with the opponents not intervening. Precision in the hands of Meckstroth and Rodwell might get there but for us mere bridge mortals I really cannot see an easy path to 6♣. You can guess your way to 6♣, but anyone can do that and claim credit afterwards. Bidding it constructively to 6♣ is another matter.

We can bid it without the intervention I think, but not so easily with it (and meckwell couldn't bid it quite so easily over 2♣-3♦-3♠-4/5♦) they'd be guessing just as much, 5♠ isn't making 6♣ is a punt, 5♦ is -2.

Without intervention (unlikely with that many diamonds missing), we bid:

1♣-1♠
2♣-2♦(art asking)
2♥(4♥/6+♣ or would rebid 1♥, and VERY likely to be more than 6 as suit is known bad from partner's AK)-3♦(forcing noise)
4♣(no diamond stop or partial spade support)-4♦(ace ask)
5♣(2+Q)-6♣

partner is known to hold A♠/A♥ and with a club suit without the AK is almost certain to have a 7th with not rebidding 1♥ so has a singleton diamond, you can basically picture his whole hand

[KingCovert]

 smerriman, on 2020-July-16, 16:32, said:

Knowing your partner has a good 6 card spade suit, are you really going to prefer trying to sign off in 4♣, opposite a potential void, to raising with your singleton ace?

Let's look at the implications of the auction once 3♠ has been bid:

• South has enough playing strength to double.
  
• South has 4♥ and 5+♣.
  
• South has seemingly 2-♠.
  
• North has 6+♠.
  
• North has 3-♥.
  
• North has sufficient values to bid 3♠ freely.

I really fail to see how 4♣ is a sign off. It seems like a sincere attempt to improve the contract. It's certainly not forcing, but, I'd say that possibly every hand partner passes with is going to be a good pass.

I understand your criticism, but, I also think that it's poorly thought out criticism. I think you'd struggle very hard to deliver me any deal that suggests playing strength for both North and South in a suit contract, an inability to bid NT, the lack of a heart fit, takes into consideration the length implications of the auction so far, and now North can have a club void?

Both players should be keenly aware of their playing strength in this auction, it's really strong. Both players are certainly pushing to improve the contract, but, have yet to find the best fit. It's for this reason that I say that 4♣ seems to me to be an attempt to improve the contract, not a sign off. North with those values in clubs has absolutely no problem raising 5♣. But, what contract would you like to play if North had a hand like this?

---

In spades, and on a spade lead, you've got 2 diamond losers, 2 club losers, possibly a heart loser. Whereas 4♣ looks incredibly solid.

[dokoko]

Several posters suggested North bidding 3♠ at some point where I think it's unclear at least whether this bid is forcing. With both hands in sight it's easy to suggest bidding sequences without getting dropped in a partscore, but at the table I would not dare to bid 3♠ in any of those situations, and if I did I'd expect to play it there more often than not.

[KingCovert]

 dokoko, on 2020-July-19, 03:29, said:

Several posters suggested North bidding 3♠ at some point where I think it's unclear at least whether this bid is forcing. With both hands in sight it's easy to suggest bidding sequences without getting dropped in a partscore, but at the table I would not dare to bid 3♠ in any of those situations, and if I did I'd expect to play it there more often than not.

Honestly, I don't agree with anything you've stated here, but, my bigger objection is that you've failed to provide any alternative bid in the sequence or an entirely different sequence.

I can't find any use for your post, because, it is entirely vague. Are you suggesting that North should bid 4♠ with that hand? Opposite a potential void? Should North bid 5♣ directly? 4♣? Pass? Which of those bids do you think justifiable? And are they really more justifiable than 3♠?

You're right that 3♠ is not forcing, and any time partner passes 3♠, if your partner is any good, it's probably the best decision. I don't really understand the desire to remove partner's judgement from this situation.