[Antrax]

IMPs, none vul.

---

You're playing fairly standard 2/1. 4♥ was a splinter, 5♣ and 5♦ were Italian-style cue bids.

[wank]

yes that was enough. no extras and the worst possible shape.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I dont understand the bidding, ... partner makes a try,
I show interest, bidding the cheapest cue, no wastage of
room, and he signs of? What is the meaning of 5H?

The only explanation is, that he needs also a maximum from
me, that 5H is not Last Train, but first round control.
I dont have a maximum, hence I pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the hog]

I agree with Uwe. I have shown my hand.

[Cyberyeti]

What was the range of my initial splinter ? but assuming anything normal, I sign off, yes it's possible partner has AKxxxx, xxx, Qxx, A but we're not going to find that one after starting with 4♥ (if partner bids more aggressively we'll have QJxx, x, AJxx, QJxx and 6 will be very poor).

[kenberg]

Let's give partner five spades to the AKQ. Not unreasonable since he did not try keycard. Now give him three small hearts. Five trump and two ruffs, so he needs five tricks in the minors. Where from? If he has the diamond Q we are up to four tricks. If instead he has the club King we are up to five, but maybe he could have bid the slam with AK of clubs. At least I don't see why he would expect me to.

[billw55]

I admit I am puzzled by north's sequence. He likes my splinter enough to cue, gets the best possible response from me, then signs off anyway? Odd.

I am going to guess that he is concerned about two trump losers. If this is right, does JTxx justify pushing him to slam? For example how are my chances opposite Axxxx xxx Qx AKx, or even only Kxxxx? The nine might make a big difference but I can't find it. I guess will pass, but it's a tough call.

[Antrax]

Thanks everyone. The hand is from a local Bridge teacher where he told about a "good slam" he and his partner were the only ones to bid. They won some IMPs when north held:

---

Trumps were 2-2 and the ♣K was doubleton.
To me his reasoning behind raising 5♠ to 6♠ was extremely shaky, and I'm glad to see I'm not crazy. His reasoning is as follows:
"If N has ♣AK then clubs will bring four tricks together with my Q and length. He probably has ♠AK. We have 0-1 ♥ losers. So, partner is probably worried about ♦ losers. Looking at the ♦AK, I have much more than what my cue bid promised in ♦, so it's clear to raise"

[aguahombre]

I don't like that local bridge teacher's approach..I call it the "pat self on back" method.

[neilkaz]

Does this teacher give lessons in Resulting?

[kenberg]

Hard to argue with success, but obviously he would have taken matchpoints from me and others.

I always appreciate seeing the hands. That does not mean that I necessarily revise my opinion. When I review my results at the fable I try to analyze them as dispassionately as I can. In this case I think that I would decide that bidding slam is not totally crazy but I am still passing the hand the next time, just as I did this time. If this auction shows the Jack of diamonds, this is the first that I have heard of it.

[mikeh]

If this is what your teacher thinks is a 'good slam', your teacher is a bad bridge player. That doesn't mean that he or she isn't a pretty good teacher, btw.

It's not a terrible slam. I'd expect to win imps if I bid it and it made, and to lose imps if I bid it and it failed, since I think most good players would be able to and want to stay out of it.

I mean no disrespect to the many, many well-meaning bridge teachers out there. They generally do the bridge community a great service, while (one hopes) making a little money for themselves. However, by and large most bridge teachers are at best mediocre players in my experience. They should stick to material prepared for them rather than show off examples of their own knowledge

As an example, his 'reasoning' makes little sense to me.

The dialogue seems to me to be as follows:

1. I have a spade opening

2. I have a splinter raise.....near opening values (or more), 4+ trump and a stiff heart

3. I am interested in higher things and have a club control

4. I am obliged to show you a diamond control if I have one, and I do

5. I lack the heart Ace, so we have a loser there. I lack the hand that can force to slam opposite a minimum splinter. I lack the hand that could usefully use keycard over your splinter, thus I am in a cooperative auction. Do you have extras for your sequence so far?

6. I showed you 4+ trump, short hearts, diamond control, 10 + hcp. I hold the shortest and close to the weakest trump I could have, I have the longest hearts I could have, I have a rock-bottom minimum in terms of hcp. I'm done. Pass

To read, instead, that partner was looking for precisely my minor honours smacks of an after-the-auction rationalization or poor analysis during the auction.

[Antrax]

Thanks again, that was my thinking too, including the result merchant part

If his blog wasn't in Hebrew I'd send you to see just how full of himself he is. This is just the first time a post felt completely wrong to me.

[kenberg]

Before leaving this topic, can we briefly look at North's problem?

---

He opens 1♠ and hears his partner splinter with 4♥. If South has four spades to the Jack then the slam is only a little over 50% even if everything else is perfect. And usually everything else is not perfect. So probably you want to stay out of slam unless partner has either five trump or the Q.

But of course it is not enough for South to have the trump Q and the ♦A. The diamond king would be great, the club king is useless.

Let's assume that North trusts the splinter is not a stiff Ace. He could then bid keycard, figuring to bid 6 if it goes 4NT-5♣(1/4)-5♦(Q ask)- Yes, the problem being that the answer of "Yes" will usually be 6♣ if responder holds the Q of spades and the K of clubs.

The North hand is nothing to write home about but the splinter certainly improves it. Even if South has the ♠Q and the ♦ K, it could go down on the lead of a stiff diamond unless trumps are 2-2. But I like my chances.

So, as often happens after a splinter, North is required to go with either optimism or pessimism, and if he chooses optimism he still has to decide how.

Your thoughts?

[WellSpyder]

neilkaz, on 2014-May-06, 11:01, said:

Does this teacher give lessons in Resulting?

If he is any good as a teacher, he will realise that this is a bridge skill most players will pick up naturally from their partners anyway, so doesn't need to be covered separately in lessons....