[diana_eva]

Team match, IMPs, strong opps

---

Any reasonable way to reach 6D here?

System is 2/1 with the usual gadgets, nothing too fancy.

[MrAce]

diana_eva, on 2017-December-14, 18:22, said:

Team match, IMPs, strong opps

---

Any reasonable way to reach 6D here?

System is 2/1 with the usual gadgets, nothing too fancy.

• Although slam looks decent, not sure if I could reach it. I am much more concerned about going down in 3 NT. (W holding ♦K and ♥Q on a spade lead)
• I do not like 3♥ bid but if I bid like this, I would have reopened 3 NT, bidding 4♦. Leaving to 3 NT was worse than 3♥ bid imo.
• Over 1♠ I would have started 3♦, even if it is game forcing.

[diana_eva]

Not particularly proud of my bidding here, I admit.

[gszes]

2/1 responders frequently bypass a 4 card major in favor of showing a 5+ minor because it makes the remainder of the bidding far easier. There is little reason why the same logic cannot be applied by opener. IMHO the bidding might well have gone:
1c
1h IMHO there is just too much potential in this hand to justify a leap to 4h
2d no rush to bid spades we have plenty of time to show that later if needed and this gets the power component of our hand off our chest and that helps a lot
3h max 1 loser suit 6+ GF denies 4 card spade suit (else 2s even if that bid does not promise 4 spades) the large dia fit makes this hand way better
3n pretty much said it all at this point and cannot help with hearts no sense in showing 4 card spade suit once responder denies having it save 3s bid for doubt about 3n Jxxx for ex
4d this hand has some serious slam potential opposite a lot of controls and opener can always safely sign off in 4h if they have a hand with mostly quacks
4n key card for dia I would save a 4s bid for a problem with club control hand though some prefer it be key card for diamonds
5d 1 or 4
6d should be high enough. Yes responder might have the dia K vs heart Ace but such is life. Responder should have quite a hand inviting slam with only 1 key card opposite a partner that denies filling in their long suit (3n)

[rmnka447]

I'm reversing to 2 ♦ instead of rebidding 1 ♠ for a number of reasons.

1 ♠ is a very ambiguous bid made on anything from a very flat 12 up to an 18.

2 ♦ defines the strong nature of the hand (4 QT, 17 count) and shows as an unbalanced hand. Equally important, it gives a chance to show all suits below 3 NT should partner rebid ♥ as seems likely with a ♥ void.

If the auction would go something like

1 ♣ - 1 ♥
1 ♠ - 2 ♥
3 ♦

you're also showing 5-4-4, but the strength of the hand is a bit murkier. Does it show something extra? If so, how much extra?

I'm not completely sure what I'd do over the reverse as responder. I'd probably lean towards gszes' 3 ♥ call as it would get us well on the way to a ♥ slam if opener held something like ♠ A ♥ Qxx ♦ KQxx ♣ AQxxx or similar.

After the positive 3 ♥, whether opener bids 3 ♠ or 3 NT, 4 ♦ certainly must be bid to bring a ♦ slam into view. You've got controls in all the side suits and know there's at least a 9 card ♦ fit.

The other responder rebid I might have considered was a simple 3 ♦ rebid to show a positive response to the reverse and a diamond fit. But I think it suffers from not accurately showing the strength of the ♥ which might be important. Hence, the 3 ♥ rebid wins out.

[steve2005]

rmnka447, on 2017-December-15, 08:24, said:

I'm reversing to 2 ♦ instead of rebidding 1 ♠ for a number of reasons.

Can you find 6♠ now if responder 6♥5♠ or maybe even 4♠?

"2 ♦ defines the strong nature of the hand .. shows as an unbalanced hand" No it doesn't. probably unbalanced but not always.


I agree with Geewhiz correcting 1♠ with 2♠ is the solution not 2♦.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2017-December-14, 18:57, said:

• Although slam looks decent, not sure if I could reach it. I am much more concerned about going down in 3 NT. (W holding ♦K and ♥Q on a spade lead)
• I do not like 3♥ bid but if I bid like this, I would have reopened 3 NT, bidding 4♦. Leaving to 3 NT was worse than 3♥ bid imo.
• Over 1♠ I would have started 3♦, even if it is game forcing.

3♦ is a splinter agreeing spades for quite a few people including me

[ggwhiz]

I would have opened 1♦ with the north hand maybe leading to a post on how we missed a club slam BUT.

I would always reverse after a 1♥ response. Despite the heart void 4 1st round controls anywhere else takes 1 passable spade off my radar.

After I reverse with 2♠ south can comfortably bid 3♦ which puts us on a game force no matter which minor I opened (2nt starts the only way we can stop short but I would bid it anyway if not playing that) probably intending to bid 4♥ next but they can't do that after I bid 6♦.

So the biggest culprit in the missed slam to me is the 1♠ rebid.

[diana_eva]

I gave the hand to advanced robots and they had no troubles reaching the slam:

---

[steve2005]

diana_eva, on 2017-December-15, 14:08, said:

I gave the hand to advanced robots and they had no troubles reaching the slam:

I still don't think this means 2♦ is the best bid. If the good slam was in ♠ will it be found? Finding a fit in the fourth suit bid often is a problem.
Sure on South's hand after 2♦ you have good chance to find ♦ slam.

[MrAce]

ggwhiz, on 2017-December-15, 09:49, said:

I would have opened 1♦ with the north hand maybe leading to a post on how we missed a club slam BUT.

I would always reverse after a 1♥ response. Despite the heart void 4 1st round controls anywhere else takes 1 passable spade off my radar.

After I reverse with 2♠ south can comfortably bid 3♦ which puts us on a game force no matter which minor I opened (2nt starts the only way we can stop short but I would bid it anyway if not playing that) probably intending to bid 4♥ next but they can't do that after I bid 6♦.

So the biggest culprit in the missed slam to me is the 1♠ rebid.

I doubt any experienced player will bid 2♠.
Suggesting 2♠ with N hand is....I just can't find a polite word for it...sorry!
Bidding 2♦ is reasonable, but as Steve said that would be an issue if respondent held 6-5 majors.

[eagles123]

it's obviously easy to see that 2D would be better than 1S on this hand, but I think 1S is quite normal - bridge is a very easy game in hindsight!

[MrAce]

For those geniuses who like 2♠ double dummy....

http://bridgewinners...m-2-9ogrermxxf/

[nige1]

IMO, 2♦ is a better bid than 2♥ or 3♥, on the South hand.
And, (In case 2♦ is a real suit rather than 4SF), North should raise.
North should now explore for a grand but settle for a small slam.

---

[mcphee]

While I would like a slightly better hand, diamonds for sure, this is worth reaching game with such a quality H suit. In spite of partner bidding the black suit, I am bidding 2!D and hearing good news when partner raises. I also doubt partner will be at all disappointed when he discovers D are real.

[ggwhiz]

MrAce, on 2017-December-15, 22:40, said:

For those geniuses who like 2♠ double dummy....

http://bridgewinners...m-2-9ogrermxxf/

The world would be a boring place if we always agreed on everything. I know some would consider the 2♠ bid as a game forcing jump shift but my partnership does not and has the tools to get out in a partscore. It is NOT the double dummy answer to this hand, 2♦ is but I have nothing against it.

I generated 50 hands and there were 4 where 1♠ would clearly end the auction and 3 more that would in my partnership but maybe not for everyone. All happened to make game but are at least ones you want to be in. I am not savvy enough to do a proper simulation so this doesn't mean too much.

However add in the number of hands where 1♠ fetches a 1nt or 2♥ call from south with awkwardness to follow and your poll and opinion without addressing the follow ups doesn't mean anything either.

[cherdano]

I am soooo tempted to post an ATB in about a year where South bids 2D with this exact same hand, causing the partnership to miss a 4=4 spade fit making 4♠.

[cherdano]

ggwhiz, on 2017-December-16, 09:32, said:

The world would be a boring place if we always agreed on everything. I know some would consider the 2♠ bid as a game forcing jump shift but my partnership does not and has the tools to get out in a partscore. It is NOT the double dummy answer to this hand, 2♦ is but I have nothing against it.

I generated 50 hands and there were 4 where 1♠ would clearly end the auction and 3 more that would in my partnership but maybe not for everyone. All happened to make game but are at least ones you want to be in. I am not savvy enough to do a proper simulation so this doesn't mean too much.

However add in the number of hands where 1♠ fetches a 1nt or 2♥ call from south with awkwardness to follow and your poll and opinion without addressing the follow ups doesn't mean anything either.

When would responder pass 1♠ according to your assumption? (I am not saying he won't ever pass, but I am suggesting that you assume he will pass much more often than most of us would assume.)

As for getting a 1NT rebid - surely we are better off now, as we can bid 2♦ now and pretty much show the type of hand we have. Similarly we can bid 3♦ over 2♥ and are surely better off than having bid 2♠ initially - we have shown our shape, and our rough strength, and if partner passes or signs off in any contract below game, we are probably not making game!

[ggwhiz]

cherdano, on 2017-December-16, 10:16, said:

When would responder pass 1♠ according to your assumption?

As for getting a 1NT rebid - surely we are better off now, as we can bid 2♦ now and pretty much show the type of hand we have. Similarly we can bid 3♦ over 2♥ and are surely better off than having bid 2♠ initially - we have shown our shape, and our rough strength, and if partner passes or signs off in any contract below game, we are probably not making game!

We are loath to pass 1♣ with shortness there and may have some pretty wormy hands with 3-5-4-1 or even 4-4-3-2 5 counts. Openers rebid is also geared towards strength first, strain later as in we will rebid 1nt bypassing 4 spades with a lot of weak notrump type hands and that too is partnership specific.

Bidding 2♦ over 1nt shows either this shape or the more likely 4-1-3-5 and 15+ to 17- and the same with 3♦ over 2♥, leaning towards the upper end. The posted north hand is just too strong with appropriate tens and controls galore.

Take away the ♥A from south and give them the ♠Q (and ten maybe) and/or the ♣J. now give them 1-4-5-3 shape or 2-4-4-3 and it takes very little tweaking of the pts to play it there and miss a good imp game after 2♦. That's given our partnership agreement of 15+ to 17. change the shape a bit (reverse the reds) and south will bid 3♣ expecting to play it there and north now does?

Shapes like 2-5-3-3, etc. could be in jail over 3♦ if you belong in a club partial or a good (not necessarily cold) imp game where I can't imagine south playing north for this much.

ps. our well defined methods after a reverse matter a lot too.

[diana_eva]

steve2005, on 2017-December-15, 15:22, said:

I still don't think this means 2♦ is the best bid. If the good slam was in ♠ will it be found? Finding a fit in the fourth suit bid often is a problem.
Sure on South's hand after 2♦ you have good chance to find ♦ slam.

I didn't think 2D was *the* solution - although for this particular hand it works wonders. But robots aren't resulting, if they chose that bid maybe there is some system logic behind it.

At the table I found 1S perfectly normal, and I posted the hand to find out how to continue on my side. Is the hand good enough to GF? Should I pull 3NT? That sort of thing....