[dickiegera]

---

2♦ is weak

How do you get to 7♦?

Thank You

[Fluffy]

If south had only one bid it might would be close between 7♦ and 6♦, why?, because chances of zero spade losers is huge (spade king from partmer, spade singleton from partner, or spade king onside), and chances of him having ♦A... well this depends a bit on partnership style.


But we are prenty of space, lets start!

2♦-2♠. You could bid 2NT, but 2♠ focuses in spades, and you wanna know about what partner holds in spades
3♣-3♥. 3♥ to know more about spades again.
3NT-4♦. Ok, so 3NT definetelly means partner has no spade doubleton, and you can count 1♠, 3♥, 6♦, 3♣ ruffs as 13 tricks, if partner doesn´t have ♦AQ your comunications ain´t perfect and you might not enjoy as many as 3 ruffs in hand, but you might still get home with spades 4-3, or if partner has ♣A, or ♥J, or hearts breaking... Anyway lets set up trumps

4♠ (cuebid)-

Now you need tools for finding ♦A, if anything you can bet already that he has it since he colabourated with a cuebid, there is a tool by the name of GSF (5NT) wich is no longer popular but here it wouldn´t help since partner would answer the same with ♦A and ♦Q. IMO partner shouldn´t colaborate on this bidding with ♦Q109xxx so I would just settle for grand (bid 4NT just in case he has zero).

Perhaps someone else can find a better bid for extra confidence.
Now partner´s 4♠ means he doesnñt

[gnasher]

It should be easy: make your artificial 2NT ask (whatever it means), bid 4♦ to set trumps, hear a 4♠ cue-bid, ask for keycards. It would have been harder if you'd asked us how to get to 7♦ opposite xx xx A10xxxx KQx but not opposite xxx xx A10xxxx KQ

By the way, I would have opened 1♦.

[broze]

Nice hand! As they say in poker.

Well, for a start, I'm really not a fan of that 2♦ bid. People are too quick to preempt when they see a 6 card suit and fewer than 10 HCP. I would open 1♦ or a controversial pass.

Anyway, if we did start from 2♦ I'd hope my partnership would bid:

2♦ - 2♠
3♣¹ - 3♦²
3♠³ - 5♣⁴
5♥⁵ - 7♦

1) Game forcing. All weak hands rebid ♦
2) Sets trump
3) Shortness cue
4) Void exclusion RKCB for ♦
5) One keycard

[Fluffy]

gnasher, on 2011-December-16, 09:20, said:

It would have been harder if you'd asked us how to get to 7♦ opposite xx xx A10xxxx KQx but not opposite xxx xx A10xxxx KQ

what about x xx ♦Q10xxxx ♣AKxx?

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2011-December-16, 10:01, said:

what about x xx ♦Q10xxxx ♣AKxx?

Yes, that's a good point. Let's pretend I said "make your artificial 2NT ask (whatever it means), bid 4♦ to set trumps, hear a 4♠ cue-bid, bid GSF".

[FrancesHinden]

I wouldn't open 2D on that hand either.
I wouldn't make my 'artificial 2NT ask (whatever it means)' because I play 2NT as natural.

I don't understand how gnasher's GSF approach works unless you have some cunning way to tell the difference between the DQ and the DA.

I'm prepared to gamble on the spade position, but it's surprisingly hand to find out that partner has exactly A high diamonds, particularly if you are allowed to open 5-card weak twos.

[Cyberyeti]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-December-17, 12:13, said:

I wouldn't open 2D on that hand either.
I wouldn't make my 'artificial 2NT ask (whatever it means)' because I play 2NT as natural.

I don't understand how gnasher's GSF approach works unless you have some cunning way to tell the difference between the DQ and the DA.

I'm prepared to gamble on the spade position, but it's surprisingly hand to find out that partner has exactly A high diamonds, particularly if you are allowed to open 5-card weak twos.

We play 5♥ as GSF in diamonds if done early enough, so Q and A are easy to distinguish with the standard responses, however we'd open 1♦ on this.

[broze]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-December-17, 12:13, said:

it's surprisingly hand to find out that partner has exactly A high diamonds.

Not if you use void exclusion!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-December-17, 13:15, said:

We play 5♥ as GSF in diamonds if done early enough, so Q and A are easy to distinguish with the standard responses, however we'd open 1♦ on this.

Interesting. What are the standard replies to a 5♥! = GSF for ♦:
5♠ = 0
5NT = Ace
6♣ = King
6♦ = Queen
7♦ = 2 of top 3

[Cyberyeti]

TWO4BRIDGE, on 2011-December-17, 15:49, said:

Interesting. What are the standard replies to a 5♥! = GSF for ♦:
5♠ = 0
5NT = Ace
6♣ = King
6♦ = Queen
7♦ = 2 of top 3

Whatever steps you use with spades as trumps over 5N is simplest although probably not best.

We use

Step 1 - 0
Step 2 - Q
Step 3 - K/A
Step 4 - K/A and extra length
Step 5 - 2

[lamford]

It ought to be possible to bid exclusion in all three suits, as well as games in them. How about:

2D-4D = Pre
2D-games = to play
2D-2NT-any-4D = RKCB in diamonds
2D-3M-any-4NT = RKCB in that major
2D-2NT-any-4NT = exclusion in clubs
2D-2NT-any-5H/5S = exclusion in that suit
2D-5H/5S = please raise with a trump honour (probably diamond void)
2D-5NT = GSF and opener bids 6C with the ace
2D-2NT-any-5NT = GSF and opener bids 6C with the king or queen.

Doesn't everybody play these methods? (before gordontd says it).

[Cyberyeti]

lamford, on 2011-December-17, 18:04, said:

It ought to be possible to bid exclusion in all three suits, as well as games in them. How about:

2D-4D = Pre
2D-games = to play
2D-2NT-any-4D = RKCB in diamonds
2D-3M-any-4NT = RKCB in that major
2D-2NT-any-4NT = exclusion in clubs
2D-2NT-any-5H/5S = exclusion in that suit
2D-5H/5S = please raise with a trump honour (probably diamond void)
2D-5NT = GSF and opener bids 6C with the ace
2D-2NT-any-5NT = GSF and opener bids 6C with the king or queen.

Doesn't everybody play these methods? (before gordontd says it).

The sort of thing we play is: (2x-2N-3y shows a holding in the suit rather than Ogust style)

2♦-2N-3♣-4♦ = RKCB agreeing clubs
2♦-2N-3♣-3M(F1)-?-4M = to play
2♦-2N-3♣-4♥ = RKCB agreeing diamonds
2♦-2N-3♣-4♠ = void spade, exclusion agreeing diamonds
2♦-2N-3♣-4N = void heart, exclusion agreeing diamonds
2♦-2N-3♣-5m = to play
2♦-2N-3♣-5♥ = GSF agreeing diamonds

2♦-2M/3♣ are natural, strongly invitational but not absolutely forcing
2♦-3M/4♣ is fit jump
2♦-4M = to play, not as good as going via 2N
2♦-5♣ is exclusion, good hands with clubs are bid via 2N, 4♣ 5♣

[whereagles]

huh... Pard's likely length of 3+ clubs hints at no major suit losers, so maybe the simple way is enough?

2♦ 7♦

Ok perhaps 4NT first, just in case pard has no diamond ace. If he does show an ace, the odds are like.. 90%? that the ace of diamonds. Sure, if you play some sort of voidwood you can do without the guess, but lacking that a straight shoot at 4NT + 7D seems normal.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

whereagles, on 2011-December-18, 05:07, said:

huh... Pard's likely length of 3+ clubs hints at no major suit losers, so maybe the simple way is enough?

2♦ 7♦

Ok perhaps 4NT first, just in case pard has no diamond ace. If he does show an ace, the odds are like.. 90%? that the ace of diamonds. Sure, if you play some sort of voidwood you can do without the guess, but lacking that a straight shoot at 4NT + 7D seems normal.

---

[whereagles]

Is that the best you can come up with?