BBO Discussion Forums: Bid this - BBO Discussion Forums

The catch is you're playing standard american



1) Do you agree with 1S in a standard american context?

2) What now?

Hi,

#1 No - 2C, I have a GF and a good 6 card suit.

#2 Call the waiter to get us some beer.
But lets assume, I have a 5530 shape, I would be in the same spot, so ...

The problem is, that it is not clear, what 4C means in the given seq.,
is it natural or is it a cue, for us, it would be a cue, so that is out.
I would bid 6C, we are in the slam zone, 1P allwoed p to make a jump
rebid, so it was not so bad afterall, 6C is clearly natural and showes a
strong 2-suiter, although p will assume 6 spades, 5 clubs, if p bids 6H,
I will pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 00:24, said:

2c easy

abstain for rest ...nuts...

dup

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 00:24, said:

No, we have a very strong hand with a suit of AKJ975 and partner has opened the bidding, There is no need to distort the hand by bidding our shorter suits first. Also don't see how the standard american part makes any difference.

well lets say the auction goes

1H 2C
2NT 3S
3NT ?

And now we're on a total guess whether partner is 3532 or 2533 or even 2524.

This was my concern at the table when I bid 1S.

Is this an unreasonable fear?

edit

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 01:32, said:

Yes. After 3NT from p, you have the option to bid 4S, that showes 6-5,
if you want to conceal the 5th spade in favor of making a forcing rebid,
you could also bid 4C, that showes 6-4.
Given than 2NT showed 12-14 bal. (???) together with your heart void,
slowing down a bit is certainly not the worst decision, if p has fitting
honors, he will march on.

With kind regards
Marlowe

mike777, on 2011-January-13, 01:40, said:

I also might be down in 3NT while making 4S

give p

QJx
Axxxx
KQx
xx

its equally easy to show 2533 hands without a prayer in 4S

1S is nuts. Distorting suit lengths in a likely slam hand is deadly.

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 01:32, said:

Yes it is an unreasonable fear. 1♠ is a horrible call, bidding 2♣ is standout.

As to your scenerios, you don't have to guess; when you bid 2♣ then 3♠ and 4♠, you are showing 5 spades and 6 or more clubs. Partner will know that, and be able to correct 4♠ to 5♣ with 2 spades, for example. After all, your 4♠ bid does not end the auction.

My biggest concern is whether 4♠ does justice to this collection; I would probably bid 4♣ just to make a forcing bid that won't end the auction, though I would also consider 5♠ as an alternative bid.

6-5 hands are rare, and bidding systems are of necessity imperfect. It's not surprising that your system doesn't cope well with this hand opposite every opening hand.

After 1♥, you have the choice: risk not being able to show the quality of your clubs, or risk not being able to show the fifth spade. Kx Kxxxx Kx Q10x makes a decent grand slam, so it's worth making some effort to investigate slam. The 3♥ rebid in your actual sequence made things very hard, but there are other, more likely auctions where showing ♣AKJxxx will be difficult, eg 1♥-1♠;2♦ or 1♥-1♠;2♥. Even after 1♥-1♠;1NT very few pairs could show 5-6, and not everyone could show 5-5.

Some of your concerns seem misplaced:

- After 1♥-2♣;2NT-3♠;3NT, partner won't be 2524, because he would have raised clubs.

- "I also might be down in 3NT while making 4S". I don't think anyone is suggesting that you pass 3NT.

- "its equally easy to show 2533 hands without a prayer in 4S". If it goes 1♥-2♣;2NT-3♠;3NT-4♠, partner shouldn't pass with such a hand - he should bid 5♣.


Finally, after 1♥-2♣;2NT-3♠;3NT, I think that the correct action is 4♦, a slightly unusual use of Fourth Suit Forcing.

Don't know if you knew this but you have more clubs than spades

You bought yourself a real mess with the 1♠ bid. I think I would just bid 6♣ now and hope for the best.

By the way, 1♠ turned out bad but it sure is a bid I might also make if distracted LOL. If you stop to think, 2♣ is surely better. Then you bid/rebid spades to show a game-forcing 6-5 and from there on it should be easy:

1♥ 2♣
2♥ 2♠
2/3x 3♠

or

1♥ 2♣
3♥ 3♠
etc...

rduran1216, on 2011-January-13, 00:24, said:

You should start again with 2♣. You have reversing values, so you have no reason to reply anything else. But more controversially, IMO you should consider 2♣ even with
♠ Axxxx ♥ - ♦ xxx ♣ AKJxx

Now 6♥ = 10, 4N (RKCB for ♥) = 9, 6N = 8, 6♣ = 7, 7N = 6, 5♥ = 7.
How do you extract yourself from the predicament, in which your 1♠ bid has landed you?. The problem is that you have misdescribed your hand so badly that 4♣ will be taken as a cue-bid. Initially, I guessed to bid 5♥ but on refection that seems rather timid, so I suggest 6♥.

2♣ not 1♠ please.

Partner needs as little as Kxx, Axxxxx, xx, xx to give you a playable slam, and partner has a lot more than this.

Not sure I have the necessary nerve to bid 6♣, but very tempted.

mike777, on 2011-January-13, 01:08, said:

Since I play 4♣ now as cuebid, only 6♣ is left, that's my bid.

I would also start with 1♠ on most 5-6 hands, but the suit quality disparity makes me think 2♣ is better this time.

1S was unfortunate, 2C and then spades and this would be easier, or then not, who knows. But what is done is done, water under the bridge and things like that. Im not an expert in standard american, but i take 3H as an reverse and round force at least, according to that i bid 4C as game forcing.
Im going to a slam, which one, i dont know yet, but if prd bids hearts again its 6H. 6S is not a option since prd can support us next round with Jx or something like that. 6H, 6C or 6Nt r still available.

1♠???!!! Wrong forum. Seriously Aaron...

I hate SAYC for hands like this, but 2♥ should be forcing anyway, so a jump to 3 is not necessary. I still think that you need some very defined parameters for a 3♥ call. It needs to say, "partner - opposite your 13 cards, hearts are going to be trump". Therefore, 3♠ is a cue and we'll let CHO take control until 5N anyway. If we miss 7♣ opposite x AQJT9xx AQ Qxx, its not my fault. However, people that go tot the bother of these agreements are not playing SAYC