[jocdelevat]

FONT=Courier]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass
 1♥    Pass  2♦    Pass
 2♥    Pass  how you bid from here those hands.

I was east and I was in doubt what suit slam should I choose and how to get there.



Thanks in advance for your advice

[mike777]

2H promises 6H for me but many disagree, now I just rkc for hearts.
Ya I use rkc alot more than most forum posters.

[jillybean]

2♥ could be 5 for me so I see no reasonable way forward, is 2♠ (yuk) responder reverse 100% forcing?

[goobers]

Assuming the 2/1 is not 100% GF, I think I'll try 3♣ and hope I can untangle the mess later...

[jillybean]

goobers, on Apr 10 2007, 10:58 AM, said:

Assuming the 2/1 is not 100% GF, I think I'll try 3♣ and hope I can untangle the mess later...

3♣ can be passed in sayc?

[goobers]

jillybean2, on Apr 10 2007, 01:01 PM, said:

goobers, on Apr 10 2007, 10:58 AM, said:

Assuming the 2/1 is not 100% GF, I think I'll try 3♣ and hope I can untangle the mess later...

3♣ can be passed in sayc?

Not for me! If 3♣ can be passed, then I give up and bid 4♥ or 5♦ or something like that. I will also not play with someone who thinks 3♣ here is not forcing

[inquiry]

jocdelevat, on Apr 10 2007, 11:25 AM, said:

FONT=Courier]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass
 1♥    Pass  2♦    Pass
 2♥    Pass  how you bid from here those hands.

I was east and I was in doubt what suit slam should I choose and how to get there.

Thanks in advance for your advice

This is an ackward hand of sorts. First, why did West not open 2♥ (well, I would open 1♥, but I open extremely light). Second, are you playing 2/1 GF or not?

Let's assume you are playing 2/1 GF along with serious 3NT. Odds are you are not, but lets assume that. The bidding could be...

1H - 2D
2H - 3H (game force, set trumps)
4D - 4NT
5H - 6NT/6H/6D

3H was game force, set trumps

4D = denied serious slam interest, denied A or K of spades and A or K of clubs and showed either A, K or Q of diamonds.

4NT = RKCB

5H = two keycards (must be AK of hearts from bidding) denies heart Queen

6NT = may not be the safe contract, if partner has five hearts, we have 7D, 3H, 1S so a spade lead might beat us before we get a lead. But given partners very weak hand, I am willing to bet he has six hearts or heart jack or spade QJ (best he can be to give us trouble is without that holding is Qxx AKxxx Q JTxx and even then on a spade lead we have a chance if the spade king is right.

6D and 6H are both playable and after the 4D cue-bid you know it.

--------------------------

At SAYC this is more problematic. 3H is ofter non-forcing and jump to 4H will not cut it. So you might try a frocing 3C (new minor forcing). PArtner will rebid 3H and you are on your own to figure out how best to proceed. I would probalby cue-bid 3♠ and partner will bid 4♦. Now I you know the club ACE is missing and you might as well close your eyes and bid 5NT (pick a slam, partner will pick 6H) or just bid 6H.

[jdonn]

I think Ben's post is all pretty much true, but far too complicated of an approach for B/I.

Responder should rebid 3♦ if he plays 2/1, or 3♣ if he plays SAYC (since 3♦ would not be forcing.) In either case opener would then bid 3♥, and responder is good enough to simply use blackwood and bid 6♥. No reason to get too fancy.

[Apollo81]

At responder's second bid:

If you are playing 2/1 GF and 2♥ promises 6+
Bid 3♦ planning to bid RKC later or just bid RKC now.

If you are playing 2/1 GF and 2♥ does not promise 6+
Then bid 3♦

If you are not playing 2/1 GF
I'd suggest a 3♣ bid as 3-red is not forcing. Partner would probably bid 3♥ over this, and you would bid RKC.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

1H - 2D
2H - 3C (1)
3H (2) - 4NT(3)
5H (4) - 6H (5)

(1) unless 2D was already gameforcing, this creates
a forcing action, looking for some more information,
and even if 2D was game forcing, 3C has the adv.
to hear 3 card diamond support, spade stopper,
4 card support for clubs
(2) 6 card suit
(3) RKCB on power, every suit is controlled
(4) 2 key cards
(5) thats it

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

goobers, on Apr 10 2007, 11:16 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Apr 10 2007, 01:01 PM, said:

goobers, on Apr 10 2007, 10:58 AM, said:

Assuming the 2/1 is not 100% GF, I think I'll try 3♣ and hope I can untangle the mess later...

3♣ can be passed in sayc?

Not for me! If 3♣ can be passed, then I give up and bid 4♥ or 5♦ or something like that. I will also not play with someone who thinks 3♣ here is not forcing

Stranger things have happened

Ignore what I said, 3♣ is of course nmf

[mike777]

JB.....3c is not nmf.....


nmf only applies at the two level.

A new suit bid at the three level though should be forcing, it just is not called nmf which is simply a checkback bid asking partner about his major suit holdings.

[firmit]

jocdelevat, on Apr 10 2007, 06:25 PM, said:

1♥ - 2♦ 
2♥ - ?

A lot of forcing bids here; 3♦ is probably the only non-forcing one...

I think I would like to show maximum 2card support in some fashion. 3♥ would certainly be slamish, but would it not deny spade cue? Also, with a beginner or alike, (ALMOST like myself ), I would not take the chance of partner passing 3♥, saying it was invite only.... (yes, they do exist!)

What's wrong with 3♠? Some might argue it would be splinter, but when partner is limited, I am in the driver seat..... Cue-bidding and setting trumph would be my choice.

Edit:
But as many of you have said - why not keep it simple. Both 3♣ and 4NT are perfectly valid bids.

[goobers]

I play (even in SAYC) that opener is unlimited when he rebids 2♥ in a 2/1 sequence. Is this uncommon?

[kenberg]

Looking at both hands, and playing imps, you choose 6D. The heart slam goes down on a 4-1 trump split while it takes a Hawaii to beat 6D. If you find out how to discover this during the bidding, bottle it and sell it, you will make a fortune. I'm guessing the question of how to divine this fact is on your mind. It went down in 6H?

6N is actually better than 6H. With a 3-2 heart split there are tricks galore. If the hearts are 4-1 you may not need them. Perhaps (you wish) you get a club lead. Even on a spade lead there are some squeeze possibilities. Not good ones, since the count isn't rectified, but there are a couple of different chances. Not that this will be clear either during the bidding since it also depends on discovering the Q of diamonds in your partner's hand.

I would be surprised to find many pairs playing something other than 6H, reached on one of the various auctions given above.

[awm]

Playing SAYC, I would start with a 3♦ strong jump shift from responder. You have an essentially self-sufficient diamond suit, which will usually be the right place to play the hand. The 3♦ bid sets up a game force and very often sets the suit as well.

Playing 2/1 GF, I would start with 2♦ and rebid 3♦. Opener's 2♥ rebid could be on any minimum and doesn't promise six hearts all the time. Certainly I wouldn't want to commit to hearts with Qx and such a good diamond suit.

There are a lot of ways the auction from here could reach the best slam of 6♦.

Note that in SAYC (or other forms of standard) it's hard to show a strong, game-forcing single-suited hand after a 2/1 bid since rebidding the suit is NF. The fix for this problem is to play strong jump shifts, which are part of most versions of standard (including SAYC).

In 2/1 GF (including suit rebid), the problem is with weak or invitational one-suiters. Since neither is strong enough for a 2/1 bid, they both start with 1NT (forcing) and then it becomes hard to distinguish the two (for example 1♥-1NT-2♦-3♣ is ambiguous and could be 6 points or 11). For this reason many 2/1 GF players use direct jump shifts as either weak or invitational.

[P_Marlowe]

goobers, on Apr 10 2007, 05:34 PM, said:

I play (even in SAYC) that opener is unlimited when he rebids 2♥ in a 2/1 sequence. Is this uncommon?

No, it is even standard / systemic,
but it is dangerous playing with an
unknown partner.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[FrancesHinden]

awm, on Apr 10 2007, 11:50 PM, said:

Playing SAYC, I would start with a 3♦ strong jump shift from responder. You have an essentially self-sufficient diamond suit, which will usually be the right place to play the hand. The 3♦ bid sets up a game force and very often sets the suit as well.

Playing 2/1 GF, I would start with 2♦ and rebid 3♦. Opener's 2♥ rebid could be on any minimum and doesn't promise six hearts all the time. Certainly I wouldn't want to commit to hearts with Qx and such a good diamond suit.

There are a lot of ways the auction from here could reach the best slam of 6♦.

Note that in SAYC (or other forms of standard) it's hard to show a strong, game-forcing single-suited hand after a 2/1 bid since rebidding the suit is NF. The fix for this problem is to play strong jump shifts, which are part of most versions of standard (including SAYC).

In 2/1 GF (including suit rebid), the problem is with weak or invitational one-suiters. Since neither is strong enough for a 2/1 bid, they both start with 1NT (forcing) and then it becomes hard to distinguish the two (for example 1♥-1NT-2♦-3♣ is ambiguous and could be 6 points or 11). For this reason many 2/1 GF players use direct jump shifts as either weak or invitational.

I second all of this. Responder has a strong jump shift in diamonds hand type. If playing SAYC (or Acol!) show this with a 3D strong jump shift in response to 1H. If playing 2/1, show this hand type by responding 2D then bidding 3D.

[whereagles]

I think I would bid it

..... 3♦
3♥ 4NT
5♥ 6♥

but of course this is match/opps dependant.

[kenberg]

I am a fan of the strong jump shift and indeed 1H-3D is a good start at getting to 6D. The problem remains, however. The Q of diamonds and the six of spades could just as well be the Q of spades and the four of diamonds. Now 6H, requiring a 3-2 break, is highly preferable to 6D, requiring a finesse and a 3-2 break. How do you determine this? An agreement I have had in some partnerships is that a strong jump shift, followed immediately by rkc, is rkc for the strong jump shift suit (not what you would call basic SAYC). That would work here but I see it as a bit contrived.

In all partnerships that I have, playing whatever I play, I believe I would end in 6H.