[Fluffy]

Jlall, on Jul 10 2007, 03:27 AM, said:

1D-1S
2S 2N(asking)
4H(max, 4 trump short hearts) 4N
5H 5N
7S is possible.

I'd bid more or less the same, but I'd bid 3♥ instead of 4 because I already showed 4 trumps . Saving space won't matter much though, probably blackwood is made by west instead.

[Echognome]

jtfanclub, on Jul 10 2007, 08:59 AM, said:

Golady absolutely kicks butt. It is legal at all levels in the U.S, and easy to understand.

Can anyone explain to me why a Golady 2♣ bid is legal at all levels in the U.S., but a GF 2♣ relay bid is not? In particular, it seems like a relay to me when one of the follow ups is a further ask.

[kenrexford]

Echognome, on Jul 10 2007, 02:05 PM, said:

jtfanclub, on Jul 10 2007, 08:59 AM, said:

Golady absolutely kicks butt.  It is legal at all levels in the U.S, and easy to understand.

Can anyone explain to me why a Golady 2♣ bid is legal at all levels in the U.S., but a GF 2♣ relay bid is not? In particular, it seems like a relay to me when one of the follow ups is a further ask.

I cannot speak for this other version of Golady.

The GCC in ACBL-land allows any conventional responses which guarantee GF values but are not part of a relay system.

This cannot be deemed a "relay system" unless Stayman is deemed a relay system.

Here's the parallel:

With Stayman, 2♣ asks for a 4-card major.
With Golady, 2♣ invites Opener to show a 4-card major, by bidding one below his 4-card major.

With Stayman, you might not have either major.
With Golady, you might not have either major.

With Stayman, you might have long clubs or long diamonds and GF values.
With Golady, you might have long clubs or long diamonds and GF values.

How about a strong 2♣ opening, followed by 2♦ waiting? How many different hands are possible in that sequence? 2♦ does not even need to be GF.

This new Golady is a bit strange to me, and it misses a lot of the benefits I have seen. However, the way I play it, 2♣ shows GF and:

1. balanced with no 5-card major, or
2. any 4441, or
3. 5+ clubs and no 5-card major, or
4. 5+ diamonds and no 5-card major.

Opener's rebids are "natural," with the sole "artificiality" being bids one below the suit (transfer-like). There is no artificial relay acceptance, no call that says nothing other than "I'm waiting to hear to what you want to say."

Also, in my version, there os no "follow up" of another asking bid. There are no asking bids, let alone a follow-up asking bid.

So, this is not a relay system, IMO.

[keylime]

I think failing to get to grand is cause for more slam bidding practice. Six should be acheived relatively easily; seven requires some science I feel.

Standardish auction:

1D - 1S
2S - 3D* (G/F)
4C - 4NT* (KC)
answer - 5NT* (spec kings?)
6D* (KD, no KC) - 6H* (if heart singleton, GS please)
7S


Ultra Auction:

1S* (canape style) - 2C* (art g/f)
2S* (diamond canape) - 2NT* (what's left?)
3C* (club fragment) - 3D* (beta ask)
3NT* (4 controls) - 4S* (control ask)
5C* (one of top three honors) - 5H* (control ask)
6H* (stiff heart) - 7S

[Echognome]

keylime, on Jul 10 2007, 05:15 PM, said:

Ultra Auction:

1S* (canape style) - 2C* (art g/f)
2S* (diamond canape) - 2NT* (what's left?)
3C* (club fragment) - 3D* (beta ask)
3NT* (4 controls) - 4S* (control ask)
5C* (one of top three honors) - 5H* (control ask)
6H* (stiff heart) - 7S

Just some questions on this auction.

By the 3♣ bid is opener known to be 4=1=5=3? Or could he be 4=0=6=3? 4=0=5=4? 4=1=6=2?

As far as I can tell, the ♦Q is not known in your auction. So why are you asking about the ♥ control when the heart shortness is already known from the shape ask above? Or is it possible that opener is 4=2=5=2? Or are you looking for a stiff K? I don't understand. Without the ♦Q the odds on grand drop tremendously. In fact, I feel much more comfortable bidding the grand with possession of the ♦J.

[twcho]

I am wondering why so many posts here suggested west to respond with 2♠ and then the partnership can explore slam with more space. For me, 2♠ is a vast underbid and east, upon hearing this rebid from partner, should not dream of slam possibility.

And if, as some posters suggested, 3♥ is construed as mini-splinter, how one can show ♣ stiff instead of ♥ stiff over 1♠?

[kenrexford]

twcho, on Jul 10 2007, 08:48 PM, said:

I am wondering why so many posts here suggested west to respond with 2♠ and then the partnership can explore slam with more space. For me, 2♠ is a vast underbid and east, upon hearing this rebid from partner, should not dream of slam possibility.

This is the visualization problem on this hand, arising from quantitative bash thinking.

Responder has ♠AQJ10 ♥Axx ♦A10xx ♣xx

So, can slam be on opposite a mere 2♠call?

Well, let's imagine a very simple and very light hand for Opener. He is known to have four spades, and he usually has 4+ diamonds. How about something like:

♠Kxxx ♥xx ♦KQxxx ♣Ax?

This hand is well within parameters for a 2♠ raise, Opener having a mere 12 HCP's, no stiffs. Sure, a six-loser hand, but not every six-loser hand should be handled with a jump to 3♠, should it? I mean, isn't 12 HCP's, with +2 for shape, just a simple raise any more?

And yet, 12 tricks turns on diamonds behaving (3-1 at worst) and a 3-2 spade split. Not all that unreasonable. Make the diamonds KQJxx, still with two doubletons, and is everyone jumping to 3♠? The hand would be ♠Kxxx ♥xx ♦KQJxx ♣Ax. Nice, but 3♠?

How about a more jazzy hand?

♠Kxxx ♥x ♦Kxxxxx ♣Ax?

A mere 10-count now. Again, a six-loser hand, but really tenuous and probably not a universal jumping hand. However, slam looks fair, and the grand even looks reasonable. A mere 25 combined points.

Interesting to note, the six-loser hand opposite the four-cover hand somehow makes slam. This is not an uncommon phenomenon. When the partnership plays in a 4-4 fit having a 5-4 or 5-3, or even 6-3/6-4 on the side, the LTC estimate is low. These deals produce tricks, if the controls are present. Quantitative bash misses all of this.

So, whether 2♠ is a vast underbid or not, the slam should still be sought, IMO.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Jul 10 2007, 08:43 AM, said:

I think it's perhaps possible but very difficult to construct auctions to reach a grand that won't reach one if west has K9xx x KQJx AJxx, if someone is being honest with themself.

With my regular partner we'd start the bidding 1♦-1♠-3♥.
This sequence by opener shows 5+♦'s, 4♠'s and short ♥'s. Our 1♦ opening shows an unbalanced hand with 5+♦'s, unless 4441 with a singleton ♣. I'm aware that most americans would open your example hand 1♦, and thus might reach the grand lacking one trick.

Btw, I'd most probably open 1♣ in a standard system with your example hand too. Most Norwegians (far from all) would in fact.

[cherdano]

jdonn, on Jul 10 2007, 12:43 AM, said:

I think it's perhaps possible but very difficult to construct auctions to reach a grand that won't reach one if west has K9xx x KQJx AJxx, if someone is being honest with themself.

Why that? Opposite all keycards, the original hand needs >=3 hearts and good trumps, or a 5th spade, or another trick somewhere else to make grand good, your hand needs a lot more.

Arend

[kenrexford]

cherdano, on Jul 18 2007, 04:28 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 10 2007, 12:43 AM, said:

I think it's perhaps possible but very difficult to construct auctions to reach a grand that won't reach one if west has K9xx x KQJx AJxx, if someone is being honest with themself.

Why that? Opposite all keycards, the original hand needs >=3 hearts and good trumps, or a 5th spade, or another trick somewhere else to make grand good, your hand needs a lot more.

Arend

I think jdonn is right in this regard, to a point. Some auctions that some will have will reach a point where Responder, who is likely to be the decision-maker in many auctions, will be unable to know whether Opener has 4441 or 5431 as his pattern. That fifth club will be critical to the grand in many such auctions.

The difficult solution, however, seems to be that a 6♥ Last Train call almost always is available at the SOGOTP point, and in every context I have imagined the fifth club will be the reason for Opener to accept.

[ArcLight]

Hannie, on Jul 10 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

I don't understand the 1D-1S-3S auction. If you think that the hand is good enough for the 3-level then the 3H seems right.

Hannie,

Doesn't 1♦-1♠, 3♠ show a highly invitational hand, but is not forcing.

While: 1♦-1♠, 3♥ is a game forcing splinter in support of spades.
(Sinec 2♥ is a reverse , you don't need a jump shift)

Is opener really THAT strong, that they can force to game opposite a 6-7 HCP hand?

Responder could have something like
♠ Q x x x
♥ K x x
♦ x x
♣ K x x x

In this case, the diamond fit is huge, and those spades are quite nice.
I think it was just luck that the grand makes.

[SoTired]

Don't most play that 1D 1S 3H = inv spade raise with heart shortness and 1D 1S 4H = GF with heart shortness?

[Fluffy]

Agree with Justin, 5NT is the key to diferentiate solid diamonds.

I have learnt that KQx(x) is bid as 2 keycards (6♥) while KQJxx should bid 7. Curiously I wasn't taught what to bid with KQJx. Maybe 6♠, having spades as trumps might save the day.

[Echognome]

Jlall, on Jul 18 2007, 06:40 AM, said:

SoTired, on Jul 18 2007, 09:24 AM, said:

Don't most play that 1D 1S 3H = inv spade raise with heart shortness and 1D 1S 4H = GF with heart shortness?

yes.

Hmm and I thought that people played it (slightly) differently.

That is to say that 3♥ was invitational OR slammish, whereas 4♥ had only game interest, but not significant extras. I.e. so we can break it down into three ranges to distinguish, say:

Kxxx x KQxxx Axx

Kxxx x AQxxx AQx

AQxx x AKQxxx Ax