[twcho]

Scoring: IMP

---

This hand was played during US Senior trial.

At one table, the bidding went:
1♦-1♠-2♠!-4♠

At the other table, the bidding went:
1♦-1♠-3♠-6♠!

Both tables failed to reach the excellent 7♠ contract and one even stopped at game level only.

Can one construct an auction to reach the grand with confidence (to bid grand, of course you must know that your chance is very good before you bid it)?

[TimG]

A start like 1♦-1♠; 3♥-4♦ ought to get the partnership there.

[twcho]

The mini-splinter of course work excellently in this hand. But I just wonder how you would construct your system for response to 1M opening.

There are three suits possible for mini-splintering, it will take up 3 available bidding spaces which maybe better utilized in other ways.

[jdonn]

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.

[Codo]

If opener simply rebid 2 Spade, I would never reach slam. I look at a balanced 15 HCPs opposite a hand which has at most 15 Points too. No way to bid slam.

After 1 ♦ 1 ♠ 3 ♥ ( or even 3 ♠) a small slam is easy, but a grand impossible to reach as long as you cannot find out about the 5 diamond, the heart single, the diamond queen and all the KCs.

I cannot, so maybe I am qualified for the US senior trials...

[Gerben42]

Quote

The mini-splinter of course work excellently in this hand. But I just wonder how you would construct your system for response to 1M opening.

This is a different situation, the opening bid was 1m?
I think the 1♦ - 1 - 3 - 6 auction was reasonable.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Discovering the spade fit and the
heart shortage is not complicate,
but discovering the 5th diamond is
hard and that is the card that makes
the grand good.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kenrexford]

Another nice hand for Golady:

1♦ (clear opening)
2♣ (GF -- no 5-card major, but otherwise any shape)
2♥ (one-under rebids by Opener)
2♠ (agrees spades)
2NT (not two top spade honors)
3♦ (one of the top three diamonds, no club control)

The Picture Splinter (4♥) here, by Opener, would seem to be very nice. Opener has one top spade honor, because he denied two already. He has a stiff heart. He has a club control, not usually present for a Picture Splinter, but forced by the bypass of 3♣ by Responder. And, this promises three of the top four diamonds. "Inferred Side Control Previouly Denied." However, the precise definition that I use is for the club control to be second-round (Kx or KQx, for example). So, that is out. The auction continues:

3♥ (heart control, inferred club control)
3♠ (two top spade honors)

Now, the non-use of the Picture Splinter is appreciated by Opener. He seems better placed. He can count a likely 12 tricks already (four spades, five diamonds, a club, and two spade ruffs). So:

3NT (Serious)
4♥ (no club Queen, no second diamond control, heart control -- preference for answering is key)
4NT (1430)
5♦ (three)

Opener now knows that Responder has AAA, ♠Q, and no club cards. One lingering concern is whether Responder has the spade Jack. Also of concern is whether Responder has:

♠AQJx ♥Ax ♦A10xx ♣xxx
♠AQJx ♥Ax ♦A10xxx ♣xx

These are death patterns.

Opener has a nice solution. Responder has denied anything of any interest in clubs. The best he can have would be the Jack or a doubleton.

So, Opener bids 6♣ after 5♦. This must be a grand slam try. So, Responder thinks things through. Why make a grand slam try in clubs, a suit in which I have denied holding much of anything?

Well, the Jack is only useful for a grand if Opener has something like AKQx, which seems highly unlikely. A doubleton is only useful if partner has three of them, like AKx, which is more likely.

However, to be interested in a grand slam, that would give Opener something like ♠Kxxx ♥xx ♦KQJx ♣AKx, with which he would have opened 1NT. Plus, what is he doing with the heart loser? Maybe ♠Kxxx ♥Qx ♦KQJx ♣AKx? Same problem with the heart loser. The heart King, ♠Kxxx ♥Kx ♦KQJx ♣AKx? That's possible, as are many lesser holdings, when hearts are stiff.

Responder should, therefore, blast to the grand with the actual hand. With the 4252 position, he might also go, but the position is not as clear for Responder, as this hand sits poorly with the stiff heart scenario. If he hedges with 6♦ to show this hand, Opener can pass, which is ideal at IMPs.

[kenrexford]

What about after a mundane 1♦-P-1♠ start.

This is also nice if you play an unbalanced diamond opening, where 1♦ promises 6+ diamonds or a stiff/void, which is what I play with all but one partner. Now, Opener can make a simple 2♠ raise, as the "mini-splinter" is already shown and, accordingly, 2♠ is already a "stronger" bid than a standard 2♠.

This will induce Responder to explore further. He starts with 2NT, asking for the stiff. Opener bids 3♣ (stiff heart -- natural/fragment style). Responder then bids 3♦, starting a cuebidding sequence, showing a top diamond. The auction continues with Opener bidding 3NT, showing serious interest, no heart void or stiff Ace, and not two top spades.

Responder has a decision to make. He could seize control and bid 5♦. This would be 1430 RKCB, but with the "key cards" being the diamond King and Queen instead of the spade King and Queen. He is not afraid of clubs, because the limitations on Opener but serious interest must include a club control. He is also undoubtedly holding good diamonds for this auction. The answer will be, on a "seek the grand day," 6♣. Responder will now know if Opener has ♠Kxxx ♥x ♦KQJx ♣Axxx or the actual hand. But, 6♥ should be Last Train, it would seem, and this must ask for a fifth diamond, it seems.

Responder could also cue, 4♥, which must be the Ace opposite a known stiff. If Opener bids 4NT, he will end up with the same problem as for the Golady auction, with the same solution.

[Gerben42]

What's Golady?

[kenrexford]

Gerben42, on Jul 10 2007, 03:24 AM, said:

What's Golady?

The name "Golady" is a name I learned from a friend of mine in Cleveland, Ohio, who taught me that approach in the context of a strange canape system I dabbled in years ago. I believe it originated with a Canadian player named Colin Ward.

I have simplified the approach, but the concept is sound. The idea is for 1♦-P-2♣ to be a game force, and artificial. It will be bid with several hand types:

1. Balanced hands with one or both four-card major(s);
2. GF hands with club anchor, no 5-card major;
3. GF hands with diamond support, no 5-card major;
4. Any 4441's.

Opener then makes transfer-style rebids:

2♦ = four hearts
2♥ = four spades
2♠ = four clubs
2NT = 3343 or some 5332
3♣ = 6+ diamonds, probably not four clubs
3♦ = self-playing diamonds, slam try
3M = self-splinter

The transfers allow Responder to accept that suit (with fit of course) at the two-level, allowing for a nice cuebidding sequence. Golady sequences are tremendous when the major can be agreed at the two-level. This is superior to the normal auction of bidding the major and then getting muddled with game-or-slam questions or jumps or whatever.

Golady also benefits from not burying the major but also not burying the diamond fit. It is so difficult with standard techniques to refocus on diamonds and GF after initially menioning a major, usually involving all sorts of 4SF and NMF calls.

Golady also helps with clubs, finding a 4-4 fit. 1♦-P-2♣!-P-2♠!-P-3♣ is a quick-and-simple auction where a 4-4 club fit has been found, GF, and Responder might have never mentioned one or two 4-card majors.

[Echognome]

If you're going to allow any old system (and I don't see why you would), then I'd much prefer playing a transfer opening, potential canape system (such as MOSCITO, TOSR, or Echo Club) for this hand. Oh, especially since this is given as an uncontested auction.

1♥(1) - 1♠®
2♥(2) - 2♠®
2NT(3) - 3♣®
3♦(4) - 3♥®
4♣(5) - 4♦®
5♦(6) - 7♠!

®Relay
(1)4+♠ could be canape
(2)4♠ exact, 5+♦
(3)Short hearts
(4)4=1=5=3 exact
(5)Response to ask of your choice, i'm using controls in this example so 4
(6)2/3 diamond honors, 1/3 spade honors, 1/3 club honors (known to be Kxxx x KQxxx Axx)

There's even room to find out about the ♦J if you desire at a safe level:
...
5♦ - 5♥®
5♠(7) - 5NT®
6♦(8) - 7♠

(7)No 2nd club honor
(8)♦J, but no ♠J

I'm guessing Richard or Free could fill in their relays to the same spot as well as one of the Josh's for TOSR. But what's the point? I think the more interesting question is what inferences you can make in a more standard bidding system.

[kenrexford]

Let's get as mundane as possible, then.

Aggressive Opener:

1♦ (usually 4+♦)
1♠ (4+)
3♠ (game try)
3NT (serious interest)
4♣ (club control)
4♦ (one of the top three diamonds)
4NT (1430)
5♦ (three)
5♥ (queen?)
5NT (yes, but no Kings)

Opener has the pattern problem. So, he guesses.

Or, perhaps Opener simply bids 4♥, a control. Then, Responder may get the chance for a 6♥ LTTC bid.

======================================
Timid Opener:

1DI] (usually 4+♦)
1♠ (4+)
2♠ (support, probably)
2NT (general GT, possibly slammish)
4♥ (confirms fourth spade, splinter in case Responder is actually slammish)

If allowed to use sexy stuff, Responder could bid 5♦, RKCB but diamonds as key cards instead of spades. This allows a late 6♥ LTTC grand try and the grand being bid.

If not:

4NT (1430)
5♥ (2 w/out)

At this point, 6♦ by Responder must be a grand try. KQJxx is definitely enough to accept. I'm not sure what is too little (or too much) for Opener to bid 6♥ as LTTC.

[kenrexford]

A short note.

How disappointing is it for the rest of you to see competitors for the right to represent the United States in the World Championships bidding 1♦-1♠-2♠-4♠ or 1♦-1♠-3♠-6♠?

Is America trying to have its own "Blue" Team?

[Echognome]

Sorry Ken. I didn't mean to be harsh and say that you shouldn't post bidding ideas. But I do think it would be good if you could address the bidding problem at hand (namely how might we bid it in standard) and then address as a side note how one might do it in a different system. I don't blame you for wanting to show off your neat convention. But when we consider a convention there's a lot more involved than just sample hands. I readily accept that my relay system is going to have different problem hands and different difficulties in contested auctions. I enjoy playing it anyway, but I'm not going to claim it solves all of life's bidding problems either.

[kenrexford]

Echognome, on Jul 10 2007, 04:03 AM, said:

Sorry Ken. I didn't mean to be harsh and say that you shouldn't post bidding ideas. But I do think it would be good if you could address the bidding problem at hand (namely how might we bid it in standard) and then address as a side note how one might do it in a different system. I don't blame you for wanting to show off your neat convention. But when we consider a convention there's a lot more involved than just sample hands. I readily accept that my relay system is going to have different problem hands and different difficulties in contested auctions. I enjoy playing it anyway, but I'm not going to claim it solves all of life's bidding problems either.

No offense taken. I probably should have started with the reverse order.

This is not that difficult of a hand, nonetheless, to reach 6♠. That seems like child's play, and yet the one team to reach the small slam bid it in an extraordinarily dumb manner, as the contract would be set at trick two if Opener had held ♠Kxxx ♥KQJ ♦KQJx ♣QJ.

Any discussion of this deal to get to a grand is impossible without adding in some technique. Cuebidding seems required, but style of cuebidding is unknown. Most normal (mundane?) auctions will need a 6♥ LTTC to bid the grand, and yet I have no idea whether either team would follow that call.

There are lots of auctions where the partnership can scurry about, dabbling in the idea, with the sole basis for bidding the grand being a nicely-placed micro-hesitation or a strategic "hmmf." Or, a simple wild-ass guess.

One would have expected more from USSBC competitors, more than quantitative bash.

[mikeh]

Jlall, on Jul 9 2007, 10:27 PM, said:

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

I like this auction: the 5N bid allows opener to bid the grand on the basis of the KQJxx in ♦: with 4=1=4=4, he couldn't/shouldn't bid 7.

I think this is the most plausible sequence I have seen posted in the context of 'normal' methods.

The only gadget on display was the 2N ask, but it is a fairly common treatment at the expert level, and even old guys playing Seniors sometimes use it... I know, I play with a 'senior', altho he still prefers the Open field.

In the methods I play with him, over 2N, we have a more complex structure, and I would find out that he had 4♠, a stiff ♥ and was precisely 4=1=5=3 (he can show 4441 and 64, so the default, after he shows a stiff, would be 4153)... but responder still needs to bid 5N because he can't find out, explicitly, about the solid diamonds.

Of course, in a relay method, it is trivial if the opps remain silent or content themselves with lead-directing doubles... doubling a relayer is rarely good, since it adds two steps to their relay room.

[han]

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.

[jtfanclub]

kenrexford, on Jul 10 2007, 03:36 AM, said:

Gerben42, on Jul 10 2007, 03:24 AM, said:

What's Golady?

The name "Golady" is a name I learned from a friend of mine in Cleveland, Ohio, who taught me that approach in the context of a strange canape system I dabbled in years ago. I believe it originated with a Canadian player named Colin Ward.

Golady absolutely kicks butt. It is legal at all levels in the U.S, and easy to understand. It comes up so much more often than a natural non-game-forcing 2 club bid comes up over 1 diamond. Technically, you can use Golady over any suit, but the suit you *really* need it for is diamonds. Slam tries, two-suiters, 6 card majors...awful lot of problem GF hands over 1 diamond.

I use even simpler responses. Translated in SAYC, they would be:

2 diamonds: no 4 card major, 14- hcp.
2 hearts/2 spades: 4 card major, 14- hcp.
2NT: 18+ hcp, any shape.
3 Clubs: 15-17, 4+ clubs, no 4 card major.
3 diamond: 15-17, 6+ diamonds, no 4 card major.
3 hearts/3 spades: 15-17, 4 card major.

Responses are pretty straightforward. For example, after 1♦-2♣-2♦:
2♥/2♠: 5+ card suit, Game Forcing (2NT is 2, 3 of the major is 3, all other bids are 1 or 0).
2NT: Asks for more information about shape.
3♣: Natural, usually with 6, asking for more info.
3♦: Set diamonds as trumps for RKC purposes, starts cue bid sequences.
3♥/3♠: We don't use these at the moment, I guess the most reasonable use of them would be Splinter.

Sorry, I went off topic again, didn't I?