[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2024-June-23, 04:01, said:

1NT with a 0=6=4=3 would not be my choice. Why not 1♣-1♥; 1♠-2♦; 3♦? More realistically though a strong club system will likely face some clubs overcall.

Really ? clubs could easily be Jxxx/10xxx, overcall unlikely. Yes you could bid 2♦ (or 2♥), I chose 1N because it makes it easy for pd to bid a second suit.

[DavidKok]

I think they could more easily not be split 4-4, let alone with split honours. We are missing 8 of them, and overcalling with five of them is common. Some partnerships also have gadgets to interfere with 5-4 or even 4-4 in two suits, further boosting the chance of an overcall. On average I expect my strong 1♣ to be overcalled around 50-70% of the time and I think this hand is no exception.

[rhm]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-June-23, 00:38, said:

Hi,

I did hold

♠
♥ AT9xxx
♦Jxxx
♣ KQx

and I clearly intended the bid as a control bid, agreeing diamonds.
6D is a pretty good contract.

As said, I was thinking at the time, it was clearcut, but the answer showed, I was wrong.

I did choose 4C instead of 3H, because I thought 3H would show 6+ hearts, but bypassing 3NT,
should clearly indicate, that the bid is intended as a control bid.
I felt, that 4D would be less helpful for partner, the spade void is bad, but maybe this was
overthinking.


With kind regards
Marlowe

I do not buy this.
Scoring does not matter, but what your system was and your agreements do.
I understand of course that you did not have an agreement about the last bid.
From your 1NT being semi forcing I deduce that 2/1 was game forcing.

But what was 1S-3C and what was 1S-4C?
Even if 1S-3C was natural and required at least invitational strength and 1S-4C would have been a splinter, you might hold a weak hand with long clubs. Many play even 1S-5C as exclusion key-card.
What are you supposed to do with a weak hand and long clubs after partner showed a game forcing hand with 5 spades and 4 diamonds?

With a fit there are many ways you can bid. Since 3D was game forcing, what is wrong with a simple raise?
With a misfit in a game forcing scenario and a long suit, you must be capable of introducing your suit.
After all game or slam may only be available there.

I am for a simple meta agreement. If there has been no agreement about a bid and a natural interpretation makes any sense at all, the meaning is such.

[mycroft]

It's Gerber, obviously.</s>

I, too, would take it as a cuebid, on the "no new suits at the 4 level" theory. Which, yes, is a problem when I have a huge WJS. Which comes up about as often as Gerber (is right). It's great when I have a slam try for partner.

Now, I would have bid 3♥ with your hand. If opener is 5341, or even 6241, playing in hearts might be right. If partner comes up with 3NT (or 3♠, really), then 4♣ gets the point across (and shows the ♥A).

Whether I as opener take it as clubs or a cuebid, though, partner's diamond rebid will get the point across (eventually, at least). Whether it's too late after that to find out what is needed for 6 is an open question.

But these auctions are hard, which is why we set a minimum of "GF opposite 6" for them. When you don't have a fit, they're ugly; when you do have a fit, it can sometimes be hard to investigate slam after showing the fit (hence the advance cue bid games). When you have slam-invitational values (especially "makes on ruffs, not on power" invitations) it's even harder.

Good for you for even looking for the 28-point slam. I do agree that the strong club pairs might very much have an issue with interference here, but maybe only at the 2 level. Enough? Possibly.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

it would have been possible to bid 2H instead of 1NT, at least with the agreement in place,
but I am play usually 2/1 nowadays, ... i.e. I felt I was a bit to weak for 2H,
and if I had, I would not have gotten the auction I got.
I described the 1NT as semi forcing to indicate, that the real holding maybe stronger, than
one would expect, if playing standard.

But make it 5530, and 2H becomes less attractive, the same being true for a 3H bid after the
3D gf bid by opener.

Due to this, after hearing a GF with diamonds, I felt, I had to do something to catch up.
3H is certainly a valid option, although you may end up in 4H in a 6-1.
And if you bid 3H, showing 5+, and opener bids 3S, you will be in a situation, where 4D sounds
like a retreat from 3NT lacking a club stopper, and 3NT buries the diamond fit for good.


Due to the spade void, I was not willing to go beyond game, ... I felt 5D should be ok, even
if it is the unliked 11-trick game, but than again the spade void may well mean, that 3NT may
also turn out to be, a not so happy place.

And it was a friendly social game, i.e. no stress, only fun.

In a 2/1 system you may have agreed to play Gazilli, I dont play this even in my regular partnership,
which may mean, that you discover the diamond fit a level lower.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

Style and methods, as always matter. Fwiw, I’d not jumpshift as opener. We have yet to find a fit, our spade suit is weak, and we only have 18 hcp. Admittedly, there will be hands where partner passes 2D and game is decent, but there will be far more hands, imo and experience, where having forced to game with no clear direction ends up losing the board at any form of scoring. Ndeed, I think that if you construct a series of hands where responder passing 2D is correct, few will offer good play for game (for those who like to conjure counter-examples, note that I said few rather than none or almost none).

Partners rarely pass 2D in real life and we’re extremely comfortable if he squeaks. The most common action is a 2S preference and then our 2N shows 5242 with 17 hcp or so….remarkably close to our holding.

If he bids, as he would on this hand, 2H…again, we have an easy 2N…this could be 5143 but it could also be this shape.

Ok, let’s assume I had a real jumpshift…KQJxx xx AKQx Ax.

If a bid can be natural, it is natural. This simple mantra saves enormous headaches and prevents much confusion. If you like diamonds….raise diamonds. You’re in a forcing auction! There is zero risk of opener passing 4D. Yes, there will be. Hands where the ability to make an ‘advance cuebid’, agreeing diamonds by inference, works well….but bidding methods are a compromise. What you gain from partner knowing that 4C, on this hand, agrees diamonds you’ll more than lose when responder has long clubs and no spade preference or 3H bid. Btw, on this hand I’d bid 3H and pull 3N to 4D…guess what? That shows this hand or something close to it.

The thread is entitled natural bidding is hard but the example hand shows exactly the opposite. Has responder bid naturally, the hand is easy. It only became hard because responder didn’t know how to bid naturally.

[bluenikki]

mikeh, on 2024-June-23, 12:19, said:

Partners rarely pass 2D in real life.

2♦ _should_ not be passed with any 7 hcp other than JJJQQ with the queens in the roundtop suits. But I think this is hard to do.

[AL78]

bluenikki, on 2024-June-23, 13:23, said:

2♦ _should_ not be passed with any 7 hcp other than JJJQQ with the queens in the roundtop suits. But I think this is hard to do.

My experience of club bridge is that there are a fair few players who don't understand jump shifts are game forcing and they think or have experience of after 1X - 1Y - 2Z where Z<X, partner passing with a nice 8-9 count and missing game, so they jump shift on 16-17 counts. I've had partners do that to me and effectively endplay me in the bidding when I am sitting there with a misfitting 6 count.