[jillybean]

Taken from other thread
My favorite hand of the match

---

We didn't have time to discuss MSS

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2026-February-07, 18:50, said:

Taken from other thread
My favorite hand of the match

---

We didn't have time to discuss MSS

Without agreements you will struggle to find anything, but the Club fit and maybe not then. I guess 2♠ as a range ask if you've managed to agree that can get you to 6N. 4♣ Gerber or 4N would be a way some club players would go.

If you have a non-promissory Stayman then 2♣ followed by 3♣ and then 4♦ could be an approach that could trigger partner to look for a slam

If you haven't agreed 1N-3♣/3♦ then again it's a fishing game.

I do suggest to some pickup partners that 1N-3♣ can be played like a puppet stayman, but in the minors.

As posted previously I use
1N-2♣ as a non-promissory 5-card Major ask and on the negative use 3♣ to ask for 4/5 card minors. If positive then the same bid can ask for 3-card minors, but it's yet to happen in play.

https://bridgewinner...nor-suit-slams/

[Cyberyeti]

What did you discuss ? What would 1N-3♣ be ?

For us 1N-2♠-2N-3♥ would be 5♣/4♦ slammy with 2♠ being one minor weak or both minors strong.

[pescetom]

As posted previously, our best chance is our non-promissory 5 card Stayman followed by 3♥ showing 5 card clubs (the 3m rebids have more important uses). Partner can fix trumps in 4♣ if enthusiastic, 3NT if not, or 4♦ showing 5 card diamonds.
[Thinking about it, as a marginal gain we could use 3♠ for something here, although there is no equivalent when we have diamonds].

As posted previously, just blasting 6NT will rarely be a poor score at the club MP.

I don't see that Gerber tells us anything useful (yet again), even if partner shows 1 Ace and 2 Kings.

[mike777]

6NT, next board pls.

[mikeh]

It’s always amusing to see someone post a hand with the warning that she’s looking for ways to bid the hand in a casual partnership with few specific agreements and none that are applicable to the situation. Invariably we get posts advocating unusual agreements that miraculously appear as if they might help. Does anyone seriously think that these posts help the OP?

Playing basic NA standard methods…obviously you have to assume that partner will know a little bit about standard methods or there’s no point….one bids 2C ostensibly asking for a four card major. Then one bids 3C over whatever the response is. This shows 5+ clubs and game force values. Partner will assume that you should have a side major but occasionally will not.

The auction gets messy if he has both majors, since after 1N 2C 2H 3C, he will bid 3S. Fortunately that means that he’s 4432 or 4423 and so most of the time you’ll want to be in notrump…he is slightly more likely to be 4432 than 4423, by a tiny margin. You may miss a club contract opposite AKxx Qxxx Kx QJx where 7C looks good because one can play to ruff a diamond, but that’s why established serious partnerships play complex agreements, which are of zero relevance to the OP situation.

If partner has at most one major, things may progress a little easier. But I suspect that both players will feel unsure of what’s going on.

One possibility is to bid 2C, then 3C, then at some point (I’m being vague because I’d want to see what partner bid over 3C), I’ll bid 5N, hoping that partner knows that this is usually pick a slam. I’m offering a choice between notrump and clubs.

Then if he chooses 6C, I have another decision. With an expert partner I’d then bid 6N, which invites 7….I’ve bid 5N suggesting two strains then overruled his choice of 6C. Partner probably won’t understand the sequence but since I’m not playing 6C at mos, I don’t think any harm will come from this….the alternative is Mike777’s agricultural 6N, which has a lot going for in in the context of the OP.

Btw, for anyone hoping for an auction that depends on partner liking his hand for slam purposes, note that we hold 3 aces and two kings and no quacks. It’s not impossible that he will like his hand but it must be unlikely. Even if he has 17 hcp it’s going to look like a soft hand. At most one ace and two kings. That’s a big reason why just blasting 6N, giving up on grand, makes a lot of sense. Plus by bidding 1N 6N you don’t have opener leaking info to the defenders

The more I think about it, the more I like 6N. But if I think partner might understand, then showing my clubs then 5N, planning to bid 6N over 6C, is a fun way to bid with very little downside.

Finally, I do not think this hand should show a one suiter in clubs (assuming 4 suit transfers) nor do I think we want to show a slamming minor two suiter. The one suiter should be 6+ cards and the 2 suiter should be 5=5 or better or, if you think that’s too restrictive, should have better diamonds. Axxx is not a holding one wants to have playing a 4=3 fit in slam. That’s not to say that using 4 suit transfer might be horrible. 1N 2S 2N/3C 5N could work.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2026-February-08, 07:26, said:

6NT, next board pls.

Partner had AKxx, Qxx, KQJ10, xx, clubs were 4-2 offside and you went -1 lost a bucketload to 6♦+1

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2026-February-08, 10:53, said:

It’s always amusing to see someone post a hand with the warning that she’s looking for ways to bid the hand in a casual partnership with few specific agreements and none that are applicable to the situation. Invariably we get posts advocating unusual agreements that miraculously appear as if they might help. Does anyone seriously think that these posts help the OP?

Playing basic NA standard methods…obviously you have to assume that partner will know a little bit about standard methods or there’s no point….one bids 2C ostensibly asking for a four card major. Then one bids 3C over whatever the response is. This shows 5+ clubs and game force values.

I think the OP is interested in (or at least amused by) unusual agreements.
And already shrugged off the standard method of Stayman then 3C in a recent post anyway

[thepossum]

Gerber lol

Even then it could be hard to find 7

Minor transfer to clubs Blackwood etc

All roads lead to 6nt

What could partner have

Ace, 2 Kings couple of Queens and Jacks

[jillybean]

These hands are just fun. I think a lot of pairs will be guessing and yes, I am interested in somewhat unusual agreements from around the globe and the thought process.

---

At my table, partner miscounted his hand and opened 1nt. I thought for a minute, and bid 6nt.
+10 was a good way to start the match.

[thepossum]

Miscount

[Cyberyeti]

I think with the two 10s with higher honours and the 5 card suit I'd upgrade out of a weak NT so support the 1N opener.

We'd start 1♦-3♣(GF) and show it as 5♣ to two of the top 3 and 4♦ to a top honour, and I'd expect to get to 7♦

[pescetom]

I don't think this was a real miscount, I would upgrade to 1NT 15-17.

With either opening we would reach 7♦.

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2026-February-08, 14:38, said:

These hands are just fun. I think a lot of pairs will be guessing and yes, I am interested in somewhat unusual agreements from around the globe and the thought proces

---

At my table, partner miscounted his hand and opened 1nt. I thought for a minute, and bid 6nt.
+10 was a good way to start the match.

How could I bid this with regular pard?

Since we play their stuff over 1NT (14-16)
I think I need to lie about my hand.
1NT-3S (1=3=(54))start will get us to 7D, however will I think of it at the table...

But then maybe not...6NT is probably more realistic...

[DavidKok]

Since we're sharing uncommon gadgets:

My current partner really likes minor suit Stayman, and I said 'why not'. We would therefore have the start of the auction:
1NT - 2♣ (Stayman);
2♦ (no 4cM) - 3♣ (Minor suit Stayman);
3♦ (a five card minor) - 3♥ (which one?);
3NT (diamonds) - 4♦ (slam try setting diamonds);
?
and the auction would continue from there. Personally I think MSS is not a great treatment, but it's rare and partner likes it and frankly we have bigger system gaps to address.


In my Heeman-based structure I have 1NT-2NT* as (54)m or longer, asking opener to show preference. It can be weak, but here we obviously intend to bid again.


In general I think NT systems tend to struggle with strong hands with a minor suit (among other types). Incidentally, the North hand is easily worth a 15-17 NT opening.

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2026-February-08, 17:28, said:

In general I think NT systems tend to struggle with strong hands with a minor suit (among other types). Incidentally, the North hand is easily worth a 15-17 NT opening.

That's why I gave the minor suit developments some thought, despite having other priorities for the 3m rebids after Stayman.
The North hand simply looks like 1NT to me, but FWIW K&R says 14.85 too.

[AL78]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-February-08, 10:56, said:

Partner had AKxx, Qxx, KQJ10, xx, clubs were 4-2 offside and you went -1 lost a bucketload to 6♦+1

Whatever, I wouldn't lose a bucketload, at the clubs I play at I would be in good company, virtually no-one would find 6♦ and at least one pair would be in 3NT+2.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-February-08, 14:38, said:

---

Looking at the auction shown I was perplexed, but thinking about it I can see that a NA pair might struggle here due to Better Minor.
Over here 1♦ is 4+ and then even our intermediates (except for the atavic 3NT seekers) would nudge each other to 6♦:
1♦-2♣
2N - 3♦
3♠ (CTL) - 4N (RCKB)
5♠ (2+Q) - 6♦
P
If North has his thinking cap on he might pull to 6NT, given this is MP.

We would probably bid it:
1♦-2♣
2N - 3♦
3♠ (CTL) - 4♣ (CTL)
4♥ (CTL) - 5♣ (CTL, odd)
5♠ (CTL) - 5N (!♦Q)
6♣ (CTL,♦Q) - 7♦
P

[thepossum]

I think your first option, Pescetom, mimics my best effort. Hopefully finding 6NT. I would definitely bid that way 🙂

If I had my standard king ask and Queen I may find 7 lol

[jillybean]

pescetom, in my part of NA I wouldn't bid 4N over 2N , it would start like yours.