[eagles123]

I hope people don't mind me posting this: at all four tables we ended in slam. Twice 6d making twice 6n going off: but the fact 6d made was irrelevant - It's obviously a terrible slam

I will give Wacko and mine's bidding as an example

---

so how to bid this to avoid an unmakeable slam?

Thanks

Eagles

[ahydra]

Well, West could cuebid 4S, implying a lack of control in hearts. (4H would NOT be to play after 4D)

ETA: but as the results show, this is sometimes why blasting gets results when compared to scientific auctions that reveal the best lead.

ahydra

[suokko]

1♦-1♥;
1NT-2♣;
2♦-3♦;
3♠-3NT;

3♦ is forcing if direct 3♦ is invitational. Of course one can agree them vice versa too but both can't be invitational.

[mgoetze]

Too hard for me, I would just bid 1♦-1♥; 1NT-4NT; 6NT.

[rmnka447]

In your auction over 4 ♦, West has controls in every suit but ♥s. So the biggest potential problem with slam is the possibility of 2 ♥ losers off the top. Needing to know about a specific control points towards cueing. So a 4 ♠ cue denying a heart control starts the process and highlights the problem for partner.

Similarly after:

1 ♦ - 1 ♥
2 ♣ - 2 ♠ (GF)
2 NT - 4 ♦
?

A 4 ♠ cue now would also points up the ♥ control issue.

[ye17]

mgoetze, on 2015-February-22, 16:49, said:

Too hard for me, I would just bid 1♦-1♥; 1NT-4NT; 6NT.

A bit like the auction at our table. My partner opened 1NT, supposedly 15-17. N overcalled 1♠ on a suit headed by the 10. I saw no reason not to bid 6NT as I assumed (wrongly) that after the overcall my partner would have some points in hearts.

[Cyberyeti]

The problem is that in theory at MPs you ain't getting many for 5♦= with 3N making overtricks so you might as well bid 6 - until everybody does it

[Zelandakh]

This hand seems to be about finding the missing heart control. Two contrasting auctions that amount to the same thing:

1. artificial

1♦ = 4+ diamonds, unbal, max 17
... - 1♥ = INV+ relay
2♣ = nat, GF
... - 2♦ = relay
2♥ = 5+ diamonds, 4 clubs
... - 3♦ = nat, slam int
3♥ = decline slam try
... - 4♦ = asks for a heart control
5♦ = no heart control

2. natural

1♦ - 1♥;
2♣ - 2♠;
2NT - 3♦;
3♠ - 4♣;
4♦ - 4♠;
5♦

Obviously there are many many more possible ways of bidding this and that in itself makes it difficult not to be affected by seeing both hands.

I also see now that CY mentions MP. Is that the case? the OP does not say anything about scoring. It is often a relevant factor in minor suit slams.

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2015-February-23, 07:10, said:

I also see now that CY mentions MP. Is that the case? the OP does not say anything about scoring. It is often a relevant factor in minor suit slams.

The strap line with the title said "A hand from BBO indy" - I assumed this was an individual which is most often pairs scored, but it was only an educated guess.

[jogs]

Zelandakh, on 2015-February-23, 07:10, said:

This hand seems to be about finding the missing heart control. Two contrasting auctions that amount to the same thing:

You need to play a cue bidding style to avoid this 'bad' slam. The drawback is opponents will know to lead hearts against you.

[Lovera]

Untill 4♦ bids it's ok but now should starts minorwood than 4♥(=1 key) and having not raise partner has not more of three hearts and Ace is likely in diamond suit (you ought not think J10xxx in diamond and Ace in heart) than..5♦,bye.

[Jinksy]

Cuebid seems automatic to me. Screw this bollocks about 'having to bid slam or get a bad score'. If the opps have an AK to cash, they're probably going to find it (N should just lead the A if he has it, and with both AK S might find a lightner X). We can't be the only other pair in the room to have investigated slam with a fitting 32 count, so I'll take my safe average-minus rather than play for an unlikely top.

All that said, I don't like E's 1♥ response. As PhilKing said in another thread, my grandma told me not to bid bad suits on good hands (presumably we share a grandma), and this seems like a clear example, especially if 1♦ promised four of them. I'd just make whatever our strong minor raise is, and not try to discourage P from later cueing heart shortage.

[KurtGodel]

I think bidding 6♦ was way off, you don't have a very appropriate hand for slam. You could easily be off 2 (or even 3) key cards or a cashing AK. The West hand feels so terrible I'm not even sure that I would have cuebid. I can think of very few hands where partner needs our cooperation to bid this slam. I don't quite know what kind of hand partner is showing in this sequence, so I guess I'll courtesy cue bid 4♠.

If 3♦ was forcing I would have bid that, over which I would have bid 3NT (I am really not interested in bidding slam with 1 ace, ♥Qx, empty side suit. To bid a slam you need 1) good trumps 2) controls 3) a trick source. We don't have anything to advertise that we haven't already said (we are a wknt with 5 diamonds).
The sequence would have gone for me: 1♦ - 1♥ - 1NT - 2♦ (art. gf) - 3♣ - 3♦ - 3NT - 4♦ - 4♠ - 5♦.

[mike777]

eagles123, on 2015-February-22, 15:07, said:

I hope people don't mind me posting this: at all four tables we ended in slam. Twice 6d making twice 6n going off: but the fact 6d made was irrelevant - It's obviously a terrible slam

I will give Wacko and mine's bidding as an example

---

so how to bid this to avoid an unmakeable slam?

Thanks

Eagles

tough hand in an indy with few agreements.
it seems both bid aggressive in an indy with few agreements...
hard to stay out of slam when both push.
---

perhaps the rule in indy should be do not push to slam//do not be pushy???
--

jhaving never won an indy...not sure.....

[kuhchung]

edit: posted dumb questions without reading the OP

[Jinksy]

KurtGodel, on 2015-May-24, 10:34, said:

I think bidding 6♦ was way off, you don't have a very appropriate hand for slam. You could easily be off 2 (or even 3) key cards or a cashing AK. The West hand feels so terrible I'm not even sure that I would have cuebid.

I dislike not cueing way more than I dislike punting. You have a max with good shape and a fifth diamond P has no right to expect - and, despite what I said above, this is MPs - bidding aggressive slams when you're committed to 4+ minor is clearly more appealing than at IMPs.

[gszes]

rmnka447, on 2015-February-23, 01:19, said:

In your auction over 4 ♦, West has controls in every suit but ♥s. So the biggest potential problem with slam is the possibility of 2 ♥ losers off the top. Needing to know about a specific control points towards cueing. So a 4 ♠ cue denying a heart control starts the process and highlights the problem for partner.

Similarly after:

1 ♦ - 1 ♥
2 ♣ - 2 ♠ (GF)
2 NT - 4 ♦
?

A 4 ♠ cue now would also points up the ♥ control issue.

I like your start through 2s but you went astray with 4d. Why not a simple 3d which shows slam interest? When partner then cues 3s you have to be pretty much convinced there is no heart control and can sign off in 3n. P might have a singleton heart and will not bid 3h showing a control but they are not forced to settle for 3n they can make a belated 4h bid to now show their shortness since you lost slam interest when they could not bid 3h and also they are near top of a minimum. This is not really a deep set of agreements (fine for an indy) and I had a different grandmother who had a heart of gold and would have been upset if I bypassed her favorite suit:)