[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

---

[jdonn]

I am a very complicated person.

1♠ 2♥
3♥ 4NT
5♠ 7♥

Two notes.

One is that I never raise hearts directly with xxx after 1♠ 2♥, I do something else like 2♠ then insist on hearts later. I have found this to be necessary because if partner gets excited and you have three small in support, he is very likely to get to the five level and go down. So given Jxx or xxxx as the minimum, and probably better, blackwood seems like an easy bid for north.

The other is that I wouldn't always show the queen just because I have an extra card, but here I think it's clear since north won't just launch into blackwood like that with KTxxx or something, he has either better or longer hearts.

I would reach the grand opposite AJxxx AQx xxx Qx. Good luck me!

[Stephen Tu]

With agreements one could use 6d after keycard to ask about 3rd round diamond control which should also elicit a 7h response opposite solid spades.

Should opener jump to 4h to deny a minor control or are these hearts not good enough for a picture jump?

[y66]

Like jdonn's sequence and the inference about partner's suit that led to 5S. Would not have figured that out.

[kenrexford]

I'll end up in the right spot 22% of the time.

[cherdano]

1S 2H
4H 4N
5H 7H

I bid one more than Josh whenever I can.

[EricK]

cherdano, on Aug 8 2008, 03:44 AM, said:

1S 2H
4H 4N
5H 7H

That's a very straightforward and obvious sequence. Once opener shows 5 spades and 4 hearts, responder doesn't care how his remaining four minor suit cards are distributed, it's simply a mattter of checking on the major Aces.

[y66]

For those bidding 4H, how do you define this bid?

Any 5422 minimum with no ace or king outside spades and hearts?

[ArcLight]

y66, on Aug 8 2008, 07:01 AM, said:

For those bidding 4H, how do you define this bid?

Any 5422 minimum with no ace or king outside spades and hearts?

I think Arends sequence is correct
1S 2H
4H 4N
5H 7H

According to Mike Lawrences 2/1 notes, 4H in the sequence shows spade and heart support and no outside feature such as a A/K/singleton in the minors.

Therefore according to this definition I would not bid 3H. (this is one of the very few times I disagree with JDonn)

[han]

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

[jdonn]

han, on Aug 8 2008, 10:11 AM, said:

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

From now on I'll just post twice, make the second one opposite, and sign it han

FWIW I define 4♥ as two honors in each suit, perhaps foolishly but there you have it. Would people still bid it with Axxxx Axxx Qx Qx? AKQJx xxxx Qx xx?

[cherdano]

jdonn, on Aug 8 2008, 09:46 AM, said:

han, on Aug 8 2008, 10:11 AM, said:

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

From now on I'll just post twice, make the second one opposite, and sign it han

FWIW I define 4♥ as two honors in each suit, perhaps foolishly but there you have it. Would people still bid it with Axxxx Axxx Qx Qx? AKQJx xxxx Qx xx?

I define it as "good suits". Axxx in support is good enough for me. Axxxx as main suit or xxxx in support certainly would not be.

[jdonn]

That sounds like 2 of the top 3 in spades and 1 of the top 2 in hearts. Very reasonable. I think there should also be a definition on the top end (for a silly example, you obviously wouldn't bid that with AKQJx AKQx xx xx).

[han]

I wouldn't bid it with Axxxx Axxx Qx Qx no. And not with serious extra values either.

[mikeh]

han, on Aug 8 2008, 10:11 AM, said:

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

As usual, I bid one less than Han, so I bid 3♥ (I would need slightly better majors to bid 4♥... take my minor Queen and exchange it for a low heart, and I like 4♥).

I also would show the heart Queen in response to keycard... especially since partner will always hold a control in spades... often the King and in that case, my hand really grows up. Here, it is a stiff, but (as is to be expected) he has substantial extra values. I am with Josh in that I would avoid raising hearts on less than slam-suitable support unless I had zero plausible alternatives... the raise to 3♥ is very space-consuming.

[cherdano]

mikeh, on Aug 8 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

han, on Aug 8 2008, 10:11 AM, said:

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

As usual, I bid one less than Han, so I bid 3♥ (I would need slightly better majors to bid 4♥... take my minor Queen and exchange it for a low heart, and I like 4♥).

Hehe then I don't like it at all, to me a jump to 4♥ denies first or second round controls in the minors.

[jdonn]

cherdano, on Aug 8 2008, 11:33 AM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 8 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

han, on Aug 8 2008, 10:11 AM, said:

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

As usual, I bid one less than Han, so I bid 3♥ (I would need slightly better majors to bid 4♥... take my minor Queen and exchange it for a low heart, and I like 4♥).

Hehe then I don't like it at all, to me a jump to 4♥ denies first or second round controls in the minors.

I think he meant AQxxx AQxx xx xx, not AQxxx AQxxx x xx.

[Echognome]

The real hand was:

♠AQxxx
♥Axx
♦xx
♣QJx

Just wondered how you distinguished.

Seems like most understood the issue between 3♥ and 4♥ by opener and also if the start was to bid 3♥, whether or not to show the Q. If responder has say Kxxxx of trumps (and the nuts otherwise) I guess it won't work out. But you gotta draw a line somewhere.

[cherdano]

jdonn, on Aug 8 2008, 10:36 AM, said:

cherdano, on Aug 8 2008, 11:33 AM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 8 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

han, on Aug 8 2008, 10:11 AM, said:

As usual I disagree with jdonn and also bid 4H instead of 3H.

As usual, I bid one less than Han, so I bid 3♥ (I would need slightly better majors to bid 4♥... take my minor Queen and exchange it for a low heart, and I like 4♥).

Hehe then I don't like it at all, to me a jump to 4♥ denies first or second round controls in the minors.

I think he meant AQxxx AQxx xx xx, not AQxxx AQxxx x xx.

I am not sure what Mike meant, but what he wrote means AQxxx Axxxx x xx.

[jdonn]

Echognome, on Aug 8 2008, 11:46 AM, said:

The real hand was:

♠AQxxx
♥Axx
♦xx
♣QJx

Just wondered how you distinguished.

Seems like most understood the issue between 3♥ and 4♥ by opener and also if the start was to bid 3♥, whether or not to show the Q. If responder has say Kxxxx of trumps (and the nuts otherwise) I guess it won't work out. But you gotta draw a line somewhere.

If responder has Kxxxx of hearts he pretty much can't launch into keycard over 3♥. If he has that and the NUTS otherwise (Kx Kxxxx AKQ AKx?) and decides he must bid keycard then he will put it in notrump at the end anyway if we are off the queen.