[jillybean]

Matchpoints

---

[broze]

Can't see any alternative to 3NT at Matchpoints. However, I would have responded 1♥.

[whereagles]

If pard is unreliable, 3NT

If reliable, 4♣. Great chance for a club slam here.

[Cyberyeti]

 whereagles, on 2014-September-17, 01:48, said:

If pard is unreliable, 3NT

If reliable, 4♣. Great chance for a club slam here.

Not really whether he's reliable, it's all on his heart holding, if it's x, slam is near certain, if it's xxx, 3N could be the limit, if it's Kx it's probably on who's got the ace.

[whereagles]

Right. But it would be hard luck if pard does come up with ♥xxx. After all, he's got a good hand.

I suppose you can also try the imaginative bid of 3♠. If pard doesn't bid 3NT over it, odds are he has the dreaded heart holding.

[Cyberyeti]

 whereagles, on 2014-September-17, 04:06, said:

Right. But it would be hard luck if pard does come up with ♥xxx. After all, he's got a good hand.

I suppose you can also try the imaginative bid of 3♠. If pard doesn't bid 3NT over it, odds are he has the dreaded heart holding.

Yeah the xxx hand is pretty specific, A, xxx, KQ, KQJ10xxx or AQ, xxx, KQ, KQJ10xx but there are plenty of holdings like Qx/Jx where 5♣= will get you a bottom and you have to be sure of your agreements that you can stop in 4N if you go beyond 3N.

[helene_t]

Maybe 3♦? If p can bid 3NT over this it is good news as she almost certainly is short in one of the red suits. If she bids 3♥ I can still sign off in 3NT.

But it's matchpoints and I haven't discussed this with anyone so in practice I will probably bid 3NT. As Nuno says, it is good to know partner's style. If partner is Cyberyeti, bid 3NT and hope you can make it. If partner is MikeH, bid 6♣ and hope you didn't miss a cold 7

[Cyberyeti]

 helene_t, on 2014-September-17, 05:43, said:

But it's matchpoints and I haven't discussed this with anyone so in practice I will probably bid 3NT. As Nuno says, it is good to know partner's style. If partner is Cyberyeti, bid 3NT and hope you can make it. If partner is MikeH, bid 6♣ and hope you didn't miss a cold 7

While there is some truth in this, it really depends on whether something like GGG is being played. If it is (and I do play a GF bid for the really big 3♣ rebids), 7 won't be making, and 6 is possible but unlikely.

[mikeh]

 helene_t, on 2014-September-17, 05:43, said:

Maybe 3♦? If p can bid 3NT over this it is good news as she almost certainly is short in one of the red suits. If she bids 3♥ I can still sign off in 3NT.

But it's matchpoints and I haven't discussed this with anyone so in practice I will probably bid 3NT. As Nuno says, it is good to know partner's style. If partner is Cyberyeti, bid 3NT and hope you can make it. If partner is MikeH, bid 6♣ and hope you didn't miss a cold 7

ouch...that hurt

edit: also unfair. Go back over threads where posters have suggested jump rebids on 18 counts..if I have commented it will invariably be to point out that such is a bad underbid. My jump rebids are never more than a decent 17 count, and I strain to find another call on such hand....typically the jump rebid is a great 15 to any 16

Here: AQx Axx x KQJ10xx would be typical, altho of course there are many, many hands possible.

I find it interesting that the posts so far focus on xxx v x in hearts, which seems to me to suggest that those posters aren't thinking about the real world at all.

[neilkaz]

At MP and opposite my typical PD's I just bid 3NT and hope that the what ever major the opps lead is the one that leads to me taking the most tricks.

[Cyberyeti]

 mikeh, on 2014-September-17, 08:25, said:

I find it interesting that the posts so far focus on xxx v x in hearts, which seems to me to suggest that those posters aren't thinking about the real world at all.

I agree xxx is unlikely, but x (or Q or K which may make a difference to 3N but not 6♣) I would have thought is quite likely.

There is an unbid spade suit about, partner isn't as likely to have a singleton there, it figures to be in a red suit if he has one. Opps have few enough points it's unlikely either of them can do anything without a 5 card major and possibly not even then.

[mikeh]

By the way, JB: I really think that the 1♦ response was a poor choice, even if you don't like the walsh-style. The problem arises when LHO bids spades. 1♠ ought not to be a problem, but as soon as LHO bids 2♠ or 3♠, you run the risk of losing the heart suit. Assume partner passes: you can hardly afford to reopen with a reverse in hearts on Jxxx Axxx in the suits, and while you can always double, both partners are going to have difficulty getting to hearts.

when holding 4 diamonds and a 4 card major, I believe very strongly that one should respond the major. When the suits are the reds, I think it to be a very bad move, indeed, to bid diamonds first. At least if our major is spades there is less chance of the auction going badly for us after 1♦.

Put it another way: when was the last time that your side belonged in diamonds when you hold Axxx and partner opened 1♣? Compare that vanishingly low number to the times you belonged in a major and you held 4 cards in that major when partner opened 1♣.

[mikeh]

On the given hand, btw, I think 3N is automatic at mps. I don't really see any alternative at imps either, but I would be a little more nervous at imps.

Even if 6♣ is making, which must surely be on far fewer than 50% of partner's possible hands, in a typical mp field few pairs are reaching it so 3N with my partner at the helm ought to be at least average most of the time.

The problem with 4♣ is that I can't see any plausible auction that allows me to ever know that 12 tricks are likely. I love cuebidding to slams more than most, but here all control-bidding will do is tell us whether we have 1 or 2 quick losers. It won't usually tell us whether we have 12 tricks.

[whereagles]

@mikeh: that's actually the crux of cue-bidding: it emphasizes on secondary things (controls) rather than primary ones (shape/strength). This suggests standard approach to cue-bidding is simply wrong and something else should replace it.

[cherdano]

With any sort of reasonable agreements, it is possible to have a quantitative auction after this start, and I am sure Mike is aware of that. (Either play 4nt as last train/optional keycard for clubs, or bid 5c later, skipping 4nt, to show partner you need to know more than just keycards.)
But the problem on the actual hand is that a maximum is not enough, we need a well-fitting maximum, and partner won't know which cards are well-fitting. I dont want to be in slam opposite AQx Kx Kxx KQxxxx.

[mikeh]

 cherdano, on 2014-September-17, 12:33, said:

But the problem on the actual hand is that a maximum is not enough, we need a well-fitting maximum, and partner won't know which cards are well-fitting. I dont want to be in slam opposite AQx Kx Kxx KQxxxx.

Well, personally, if I held that hand, I'd lead a heart to my K early. If it won, and clubs split I claim. if it lost, then I would announce I had 14 cards and get a redeal.

[cherdano]

 mikeh, on 2014-September-17, 13:10, said:

Well, personally, if I held that hand, I'd lead a heart to my K early. If it won, and clubs split I claim. if it lost, then I would announce I had 14 cards and get a redeal.

Haha, well done, I deserved that

[kenrexford]

As a completely unrelated note, perhaps, this discussion has caused me to realize something interesting. Bidding up-the-line has a problem that is not obvious, namely removal of a punt bid. Had Responder started with 1♥, the alternative auction is 1♣-1♥-3♣. In that sequence, 3♦ by Responder is an easy alternative, because some degree of patterning out may well result (e.g., Opener might show a fragment in either major), and Responder has a pause bid to allow different sequence options. An early introduction of diamonds naturally, however, erases that option. Sure -- one could say that a major suit alternative is also an option, like a flexible 3♥ in this sequence, but (1) 3♥ takes up more space, and (2) major bids sound more natural. Thus, Walsh might be best not just because of the early introduction of the major but also because of the reservation of 2♦ or 3♦ as late auction punt bids.

[jillybean]

Here's the full hand. Partner is showing 16-17, 7 clubs for his bid

---

I'm thinking slam on these hands so in attempt to get more information from partner, bid 3S.
Perhaps 4C would have been better, if I am sure partner will give me a courtesay cue.

Mike, you are right that 1D is a poor choice. I decided that I could easily show the 4 hearts if opps came in 1S and hadn't considered the trouble created by a 2 or 3 level bid.

[Cyberyeti]

When you raise 4♣ to 5, partner might as well raise to 6, you're probably not getting a vast amount of MPs for 5♣=, it could be wrong, but I suspect the number of times you were making 5♣= and getting any kind of score is exceeded by the number of times 6♣ makes, partner only needs you to hold the pointy suit Ks, one of the Qs and ♣Jx in the probable knowledge that you don't have a heart stop of your own.