[jillybean]

---

Relatively new partnership (BBO) partnership here. I was pretty happy with the auction, we were only one of 2 pairs finding 6D, but I am sure I made some errors so go ahead and critique the auction.

If we had both been cue bidding I would have received a 4C response to my 3S bid. the 3 kc response was a bit of a surprise.

[mw64ahw]

My concern here would be the meaning of the 3♠ bid.
Is it showing a 6x4x shape, marking time looking for a ♣ stopper or a retrospective control? As it turns out either hand can drive for the slam in ♦, but what happens if responder is KJ♠451 after the 3♠ bid? For me 4♣ would be a clear ♦ slam try and show the ♣ control while removing any ambiguity.
The jump from 5 to 6♦ is also premature when you have all KCs plus Q♦; does NT or 7♦ have play?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3H is not a cue, it showes values a stopper, 3NT is still in the picture.
3S is not a cue, it is just waiting / stalling, ..., 3NT may be a lot better,
North has the clubs stopped.
4D instead of 4C is a bid, that sounds likes North cannot bid 3NT.

I think 3H instead of 3D is better, it showes the shortage, it showes the fit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Huibertus]

jillybean, on 2025-December-28, 18:38, said:

---

Relatively new partnership (BBO) partnership here. I was pretty happy with the auction, we were only one of 2 pairs finding 6D, but I am sure I made some errors so go ahead and critique the auction.

If we had both been cue bidding I would have received a 4C response to my 3S bid. the 3 kc response was a bit of a surprise.

You should never be happy about any auction when one of the partnership is cue bidding and the other one is not. An auction like that has a high risk of ending up in disaster even when occasionally it sometimes ends up in a good score. You need to identify the auction as "improvement needed".

[pescetom]

Huibertus, on 2025-December-29, 02:31, said:

You should never be happy about any auction when one of the partnership is cue bidding and the other one is not. An auction like that has a high risk of ending up in disaster even when occasionally it sometimes ends up in a good score. You need to identify the auction as "improvement needed".

I agree with that, and also with Marlowe that the best rebid by opener was 3♥ (which sets trumps in diamonds unless Responder pulls to 3NT, so now 3♠ by responder is a control-bid).

[jillybean]

3♥ looks good, but undiscussed. Is it really such a common treatment that you would use it without agreement?
2♦ is gf

[DavidKok]

I've substituted in a game one evening where we had the auction 1♠-2♦; 3♥ and I alerted as a splinter, while partner intended it to be a 5-5 in the majors with extras. I think the splinter is better, but as you say it's easy to have an accident if undiscussed.

To me this thread again shows how many different 2/1 GF styles there are, and how messy the continuations are with limited discussion or prior agreements.

Also I know I sound like a broken record, but I'd rather show shape than stoppers.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2025-December-29, 11:31, said:

3♥ looks good, but undiscussed. Is it really such a common treatment that you would use it without agreement?
2♦ is gf

No, I think any jump after a game force should be defined by explicit agreement, including this one.
But I do agree with partners that Opener can splinter over any 2/1 response, and that this can lead to unusually low (for us) control-bidding. One also needs agreement about follow ups, both over a minor (retreat to 3NT?) and over a major (3NT non-serious?).

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2025-December-29, 11:31, said:

3♥ looks good, but undiscussed. Is it really such a common treatment that you would use it without agreement?
2♦ is gf

Natural 5-5 is certainly a valid variant, but I dont think it is particular useful, if 2D is GF,
if you play Acol, this meaning is relevant.
If 2D is gf, 2H enables you to find out, if p has a spade 3+ fit, a 4+ heart fit, information you
wont get, if you bid 3H, ..., for starters 3S over 3H is simple preference, unwillingness to bid 3NT.

With regards to the splinter meaning: If the bid (2H) below the bid (3H) is already natural and forcing,
the bid (3H) is a splinter.
In the Acol scenario 2H over 2D may or may not be forcing.

[pescetom]

P_Marlowe, on 2025-December-29, 14:29, said:

With regards to the splinter meaning: If the bid (2H) below the bid (3H) is already natural and forcing,
the bid (3H) is a splinter.

The devil is in the detail after 3♥, not before, at least in the modern world.

Is 3♠ already a control-bid in diamonds, is 3NT natural, what is 3NT over 3♠, what are 4♣ or 4♦ either directly or over 3NT?

FWIW we would probably bid here:

1♠ - 2♦
3♥ (spl) - 3♠ (ctl)
3NT (ctl ♠) - 4♣ (ctl)
4♦ (ctl) - 4♥ (ctl)
4NT (ctl !♠, even) - 5♠ (ctl !♣!♥ ♠)
7♦- P

North knows South has a spades void, the 3 Aces, 5 trumps and is serious, the grand looks to have reasonable chances without thinking too hard.
Would it have gone down?

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2025-December-29, 17:10, said:

Would it have gone down?

---

lead ♣2
7=, we made 6 after playing ♠AQ from dummy

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2025-December-29, 20:39, said:

7=, we made 6 after playing ♠AQ from dummy

You could ruff them both
But yes, it's one of those hands where you could easily lose a trick if you don't take the time to decide the best plan.


Director: "Have you really not formulated a plan yet? The other tables have finished."
South: "Yes of course, but I can't see how to make the Beer Card if West is void in diamonds".