[smerriman]

---

Vanilla 2/1. Hopefully you agree with 1♣. What next?

[nige1]

SMerriman 'Vanilla 2/1. Hopefully you agree with 1♣. What next?'
+++++++++++++++++++++

Agree with 1♣. Now I rank
1. 4N = RKC. Reduce opportunity for interreference and KISS.
2. 4♣ = F/J Descriptive.
3. 3♠/4♦ = SPL but misdescriptive.

---

[Cyberyeti]

This is slightly tricky, if I blast 4N how do I distinguish between Axxx, xxxx, Axx, xx and Axxx, xxxxx, Axx, x where I want to bid the grand on the second but not the first.

[DavidKok]

1♣ is an excellent bid. I would bid 4♣ now, showing good 6(+) clubs, any 4(+) hearts and game values. The jump to 4NT should be minors here (usually 5=6 or 4=7), there is no need to blast aces/key cards.

[gordontd]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-December-14, 07:46, said:

This is slightly tricky, if I blast 4N how do I distinguish between Axxx, xxxx, Axx, xx and Axxx, xxxxx, Axx, x where I want to bid the grand on the second but not the first.

If you don't blast 4NT, how do you distinguish between the various relevant hands?

[smerriman]

I did go with 4NT, since it seemed pretty clear to me the only important cards were the two aces and queen of trumps.

In a similar vein to what Cyberyeti suspected, partner held one ace and five small trumps, and we missed a trivial laydown slam since neither of us knew the other held an extra trump.

Is this an unsolvable problem?

[Stephen Tu]

Maybe if your reverse structure forces you to rebid 2H with a fifth trump, one could fake a reverse with 2d.
Or similar if you play a 2S artificial gadget.

[shyams]

smerriman, on 2020-December-14, 13:11, said:

I did go with 4NT, since it seemed pretty clear to me the only important cards were the two aces and queen of trumps.

In a similar vein to what Cyberyeti suspected, partner held one ace and five small trumps, and we missed a trivial laydown slam since neither of us knew the other held an extra trump.

Is this an unsolvable problem?

I would go with 4NT too and face the same situation as smerriman and nige1.

I don't mean to hijack this thread but (theoretically speaking) shouldn't North reevaluate the situation and raise to 6♥ when holding 5 trumps? Logically, South's action of jumping directly to 4NT must be based on a solid club suit, excellent trumps and no voids. Something like the actual South hand or like ♠x ♥AQxx ♦A ♣AKQJxxx or ♠x ♥KQJx ♦A ♣AKQJxxx. On the flip side, South could hold hands searching for 2 key cards out of missing 3 for slam --- for example, the actual hand but with ♥Q instead of ♥K or something like ♠x ♥AQJx ♦x ♣AKQJxxx

Is there basis for North to proceed onward to slam (or Grand slam with Cyberyeti's example hand) unilaterally?

[Cyberyeti]

gordontd, on 2020-December-14, 10:46, said:

If you don't blast 4NT, how do you distinguish between the various relevant hands?

I have system here, but no guarantees, we have 2 ways of bidding 1♣-1♥-4♣ that show different things.

The sequence above basically says "I only care about aces in the side suits, no other honours"

So say the auction goes 1♣-1♥-4♣-4♦-4♠(asking aces)-5♦(2 without)-5N our agreement about 5N is that it asks for something I can't ask about in any other way which really has to be a 5th trump on this auction. I don't have this luxury opposite ONE ace and 5 trumps.

I could equally start with 1♣-1♥-2N (GF unbalanced) and if partner has say 5-5 in the reds I will hear that immediately as he won't use the semi forced 3♣.

Playing standard methods it's much more difficult. Also the probability of a 5th heart changes if as we do you would respond 1♦ any time you had 4 and only 4 hearts.

[smerriman]

Further research has shown I should have just bid the slam as South even after hearing the missing queen, given the fact of the missing 7 hearts, partner is favorite to hold the jack:

JTxx: 57.9130% (10 ways)
Jxxx: 53.1304% (10 ways)
xxxx: 40.6957% (15 ways)
----
49.1677% overall opposite 4 cards

JTxxx: 89% (10)
other: 78% (11)
----
83.2381% overall opposite 5 cards

So the cases of a 5 card suit are enough to lift the odds past 50%.

If partner shows two aces without the queen, it's going to be a more difficult decision.

[poppagene]

4N RKC - any other choice risks more than potential gains.

[pescetom]

poppagene, on 2020-December-19, 17:55, said:

4N RKC - any other choice risks more than potential gains.

Am I the only one to consider 3◇ a splinter here?

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2020-December-20, 03:53, said:

Am I the only one to consider 3◇ a splinter here?

It's entirely reasonable to play it as a splinter, we use it for something else (x, x, KQJxx, AKxxxx would be typical, 2 good suits, not a huge number of points)

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-December-20, 04:45, said:

It's entirely reasonable to play it as a splinter, we use it for something else

In our agreements 3♦ would be splinter, 4♦ is undefined and 5♦ exclusion.
It would make sense to use one of 3♦/4♦ as singleton splinter and the other as void splinter, I guess (I'm not enthusiastic about the alternative of 4♦ exclusion).

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2020-December-20, 07:07, said:

In our agreements 3♦ would be splinter, 4♦ is undefined and 5♦ exclusion.
It would make sense to use one of 3♦/4♦ as singleton splinter and the other as void splinter, I guess (I'm not enthusiastic about the alternative of 4♦ exclusion).

Our system has the peculiarity that we have 2 ways of bidding most of these things because of the GF unbal 2N rebid (I know Gnasher long suggested 2♠ for this purpose also), so 4♦ is unambiguously a void.