[pclayton]

North:

♠Kxx
♥KJTxxx
♦Axxx
♣ void

South:

♠AQJx
♥AQx
♦K
♣Qxxxx

Playing 2/1

1♥ - 2♣
2♦ - 2♥
4♥ - 4♠
5♣ - 5♦
5♥ - All Pass

** - Note** - 4♥ is fast arrival. I hate it too, but thats what we were stuck with.

Please assign the blame and comment on the calls you find questionable.

(Sorry Free, forgot that North bid 5♦ over 5♣)

This post has been edited by pclayton: 2005-February-02, 19:52

[Free]

There are several bids which seem questionable imo:

2♣: makes the bidding GF, but it's a poor suit
2♦: you have 6♥s, depends on how you show 6-4 and 6-5 hands
4♥: get real, most awful bid ever imo!
5♥: skipped a ♦ control where you have a 2nd round control (perhaps that's why)
pass: you have your 1st round ♦ control so why do you stop?

In general, I think North gets more blame, around 80%.

[inquiry]

Ok, lets see the bids...

1♥ - ok, I am up for that... I like the bid
2♣ - ok, establish game force, but the suit is ratty. I will accept it as normal, however.
2♦ - I could accept this bid, except for the 4♥ (fast arrival0 bid next. I don't think north can have it both ways, if he is planning on jumping to 4♥ if partner shows support, he can't bid 2♦ here. I think 2♦ is wrong. I wuuld go with 2♥

2♥, ok establishes trumps, np with that
4♥, can't ahve it both ways, i would bid 2♠ here, bidding out shape. I also can't agree with fast arrival with a five loser hand (after heart raise, i only count 1 heart loser with this suit)

4♠ is great, poor south has to worry about two quick tricks in his first suit. So 4♠ is fine.

5♣ - i am not fond of cue-bidding voids in partners suit, but here this should work.

5♦ - another great bid by south.. is north on the same team?

5♥ - omg, this is a huge chicken out... there is no doubt in my mind i would bid 5♠, but it is much, much too late to get to grand slam now...

I fault north, 100%... 2♦ was wrong, 4♥ was wrong, 5♥ was really, really wrong. In fact, can I blame north more than 100%?

[Stephen Tu]

My biggest problem is with South's bid of 2♥. This is a lazy call and an example of how many 2/1 bidders don't really make best use of system, they refuse to jump when it is to their benefit, then they jump with fast arrival when it hurts them. Especially when playing fast arrival, 2H is just begging partner to take away all cue bidding room. South should bid 3H, showing slam interest, which should illicit a 3♠ from North, and there shouldn't be too much problem from there.

I think North should go on after the actual auction, but South could have made the whole thing a ton easier with a better 2nd call.

[HeartA]

South bid 4S after 4H, and 5D after 5C. Even if South has wasted cards in clubs, losers North can count is at most one H if South's H were not good enough. North should take most of the blames.

[cherdano]

I also dislike 2♣, but I think anything else will either make it difficult to create the game force early enough, or distort your shape too much.
I don't see anything wrong with 2♥; I don't understand why it should show less slam interest than 3♥, and it gives partner room to bid out his shape (imagine a 3♣ bid showing 3 card support...)
But 4♥ does not make sense to me even playing fast arrival. North could show his 6th heart with 3♥, or 3 spades with 2♠, etc. His shapely hand is just too good in trick-taking potential to sell it as a minimum.

I think North down-graded too much because of the void in partner's suit.

[junyi_zhu]

pclayton, on Feb 3 2005, 01:32 AM, said:

North:

♠Kxx
♥KJTxxx
♦Axxx
♣ void

South:

♠AQJx
♥AQx
♦K
♣Qxxxx

Playing 2/1

1♥ - 2♣
2♦ - 2♥
4♥ - 4♠
5♣ - 5♦
5♥ - All Pass

** - Note** - 4♥ is fast arrival. I hate it too, but thats what we were stuck with.

Please assign the blame and comment on the calls you find questionable.

(Sorry Free, forgot that North bid 5♦ over 5♣)

Perhaps you shouldn't play "fast arrival" in 2/1 GF sequences, especially when partner can bid 2H with a huge hand, 4H would be the only way to preempt your poor partner.
Anyway, the 4H rebid is rather bad, the right bid is 4C I think, which shows shortness in clubs. After that, you can again bid 4S to show your SK over partner's 4D. And 5NT over
partner's 4N to show void C and two KC, now everybody would find the easy 7H I guess.

[Fluffy]

All the bids are perfect except 5♥ and pass to 5♥, they both should go 1 level higher.

[Free]

pclayton, on Feb 3 2005, 02:32 AM, said:

(Sorry Free, forgot that North bid 5♦ over 5♣)

Ok, then North clearly gets 100% of the blame! He refuses ALL slam tries except once to show his ♣ void. He doesn't bid his hand right, he jumps in GF auctions (I hate that when my limited partner doesn't know how strong I am) with lots of reasons not to do it, even with all controls he stays in 5♥,...

The only questionable bid from South is 2♣ since it's a very poor suit (so partner might think you have some strength there when you don't have it), but it's the best bid available imo. 1♠ never lets you bid your hand, and 2♣ puts you in a relaxed bidding.

[Free]

Stephen Tu, on Feb 3 2005, 03:48 AM, said:

My biggest problem is with South's bid of 2♥.  This is a lazy call and an example of how many 2/1 bidders don't really make best use of system, they refuse to jump when it is to their benefit, then they jump with fast arrival when it hurts them.  Especially when playing fast arrival, 2H is just begging partner to take away all cue bidding room.  South should bid 3H, showing slam interest, which should illicit a 3♠ from North, and there shouldn't be too much problem from there.

I think North should go on after the actual auction, but South could have made the whole thing a ton easier with a better 2nd call.

I think jumps are overrated in GF auctions. Why jump if you can use a long way with a lot more precision?

Isn't this a wonderful start?
1♥ - 2♣
2♦ - 2♥
2♠
South knows 12 cards from North: 3-5-4-0 and 1 other card in either suit.

Imo, 2♥ doesn't ask partner to take away all cue bidding room, but actually says the opposite: "partner, I want to stay REALLY LOW, and I want to play in ♥". Isn't this the clearest slam try there is?

[mr1303]

I think a jump to 4H here should show:


xx
AQJxx
AQxx
xx

It shows good hearts and diamonds and rubbish in the other two suits. Here North has a) the K of spades a shortage and c) extra trump length. All good reasons not to jump to 4H

[mcphee]

The bid that creates the most problem is 4H. I see several remarks about bidding 2C and 2D which I find somewhat odd. While C is not a suit to write congress about and S might have fudged a tad and bid 1S 2C is not the horrible thing we make it out to be. Nor is bidding 2D. While it is nice to stress our 6 card major it is possible S could have 4D allowing the pair to reach 6D. Not bidding D now mean the suit may be lost. Ideally I think the H hand should bid 3H after 2H which I see as co-operative and now slam is easily reached.
1H 2C
2D 2H
3H 3S
4C 4D
4S
it is at this stage that I think most pairs will fail and miss 7 as it is most likely S would bid 4NT. Now does N consider the C void useful? I suspect not.

[TimG]

pclayton, on Feb 2 2005, 08:32 PM, said:

North:

♠Kxx
♥KJTxxx
♦Axxx
♣ void

South:

♠AQJx
♥AQx
♦K
♣Qxxxx

Playing 2/1

1♥ - 2♣
2♦ - 2♥
4♥ - 4♠
5♣ - 5♦
5♥ - All Pass

** - Note** - 4♥ is fast arrival. I hate it too, but thats what we were stuck with.

I think North plain mis-evaluated his hand when he jumped to 4H. He's got controls everywhere, an extra heart, heart intermediates. True, the club void is a negative, but there's plenty good about the hand.

Given the start, I can't imagine why north didn't bid 5♠ over 5♦.

Even so, I'm not sure what hand south expected that would make a slam a bad propostition. Maybe xx KJxxx Axxx Ax?

Tim

[pclayton]

OK I was South. After I edited the post, I realized that I didn't return the 5♦ cue. Doesn't seem to matter a whole lot though.

I love Free's auction: 1♥ - 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♥ - 2♠. North is patterning out; South can visualize club shortness in the other hand and can take control. 7 might not be possible, but you'll get to 6 that pushes the board.

4♥ really muddies the waters; regardless of the fast arrival nonsense.

The reason I posted the hand is at the time, I thought that 1♠ (by me) is a better call than 2♣. He got a little turned off with 2♣ because he's paranoid about the void opposite strength (although spade losers get covered if thats the case). I've given the hand to a few w/c players; all seem to bid 2♣, but no one thinks about it too much.

If I start with 1♠, pard gets more excited about the ♠K, and rates to cooperate more. Honestly, can you ever picture a club slam if pard can't bid the suit himself? If you say that doesn't matter, how much more significant is Qxxxx than Qxxx? Not much I'd say.

Alright - if you want to know - we won the event; beat some really good teams along the way too. I'm not bitching about the way he played.

[han]

I think that 4H is by far the worst call. North doesn't have a terrible hand, and has lots to describe. With 2S you can immediately pinpoint you club shortness, so you also don't have to worry about that.

[whereagles]

Even playing "fast arrival", North has a 6-loser hand. That's an above average hand and deserves a better treatment.

Incidently, I agree 200% with 2D for 2 reasons:

1. It allows pard to support hearts at the 2-level, leaving all the room to probe slam. A 2H bid instead would see it going 1H-2C-2H-3H <-- you're one level higher and had absolutely nothing in exchange for it.

2. North's hand is worth millions playing diamonds. You can't just ignore the possibility of a diamond slam here.

Kxx........Ax
KJTxxx...Qx
Axxx......KQxx
void.......Kxxxx

[Free]

whereagles, on Feb 4 2005, 10:04 AM, said:

~snip~
2. North's hand is worth millions playing diamonds. You can't just ignore the possibility of a diamond slam here.

Kxx........Ax
KJTxxx...Qx
Axxx......KQxx
void.......Kxxxx

hmmm, let's make this a ♣ lead through your K, you already have to ruff, you'll get short in trumps and still need to lose ♥A (if that's with the 3 card you might get in trouble). If they lead ♦ or ♠ and trumps are 4-1, then you might still have problems with it. ♣A on the other hand would be reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaly nice instead of ♣K

[whereagles]

Do you mind not thinking of the worst case scenario?

[Free]

whereagles, on Feb 4 2005, 02:15 PM, said:

Do you mind not thinking of the worst case scenario?

I don't, 'worst case scenario' is usually just reality