[jillybean]

---

Club game

[Winstonm]

First off, I would bid 3h. I wouldn't endplay my pard in the bidding if he or she is holding: xxx, Qxx, AKxx, Kxx.

If I had mis-sorted and doubled, I bid 3S now to confirm the fit and suggest slam interest.

Btw, I am not trying to be flippant or critical - double here is not in my vocabulary.

[jillybean]

Winstonm, on 2021-July-01, 12:58, said:

First off, I would bid 3h. I wouldn't endplay my pard in the bidding if he or she is holding: xxx, Qxx, AKxx, Kxx.

If I had mis-sorted and doubled, I bid 3S now to confirm the fit and suggest slam interest.

Btw, I am not trying to be flippant or critical - double here is not in my vocabulary.

No problem, criticism is welcome.
If you bid 3♥ and partner responds 4♥, what do you do?

edit;
I can't start with anything other than X or 3♠, partner may pass with a min and no support.

[Winstonm]

jillybean, on 2021-July-01, 13:32, said:

No problem, criticism is welcome.
If you bid 3♥ and partner responds 4♥, what do you do?

The first question to answer for me is: can I visualize a minimum hand consistent with partner's bidding that makes slam virtually laydown?. xxx, Qxx, AKxxx, Kx is fairly minimum and would have a high degree of success. This would mean to me the hand is worth a slam try.

The second question I have to answer is: will a rejection of my slam try get us too high? Suppose partner held: Qxx, xxx, Axxxx, KQx ?

It really gets down to partner's style, I think. With those I've played with primarily, if they opened 11 it was a really good 11 so I could move without much fear. With a partner who opens a lot of 10 and random 11 counts, and playing match points, I think I would pass because the worst sin to me is to bid a plus into a minus. But I would hate it.

[DavidKok]

jillybean, on 2021-July-01, 13:32, said:

No problem, criticism is welcome.
If you bid 3♥ and partner responds 4♥, what do you do?

For me that depends on a lot of things. Does 1♦ also contain balanced minima? What is the minimum hand partner could have had for 3♠ instead of 4♥?

North failed to raise spades, so it is probable that they don't have a 9-card fit. That would place partner with approximately 4=3=5=1 if 1♦ is unbalanced, or likely 4=3=4=2 if it need not be. In the latter case we are looking at problems in every suit. Slam is still almost cold opposite a perfect minimum (♠xxxx, ♥QJx, ♦AKxx, ♣Kx) which traditionally means we should bid on. But partner is limited by their failure to bid 3♠ (some partnerships also play that 4♣ here confirms hearts, but I don't). If partner has some spade values slam is probably hopeless. Let's imagine ♠KQxx, ♥Jxx, ♦AKxx, ♣xx and 5♥ is not safe.
I think I'll pass, expecting to take 11 tricks most of the time. The odds of making 6 are probably about as good as the odds that 4 is the limit of the hand, and I don't think I can make a sensible decision over let's say 5♣-5♦.

Edit: Wait, don't you play weak NT? In that case I will brave 5♣.

[jillybean]

DavidKok, on 2021-July-01, 16:33, said:

Edit: Wait, don't you play weak NT? In that case I will brave 5♣.

yes, 1♦ will be unbalanced or 15+


The auction could have gone

---

[Winstonm]

Does your style require a cue bid from opener or is it a cooperative cue bid?

[DavidKok]

I'll bid 6♥ over 5♣-5♦. Partner knows how much they've shown, 5♦ shows extras.

[jillybean]

Winstonm, on 2021-July-01, 17:05, said:

Does your style require a cue bid from opener or is it a cooperative cue bid?

Partner will have first/second round control in ♦'s, and won't have a bare minimum.

This was the full hand

---

[Cyberyeti]

It appears N was dead, should have raised spades and given you way less space

[pescetom]

North apparently has little faith in the so called Law of total tricks.

[AL78]

DavidKok, on 2021-July-01, 17:07, said:

I'll bid 6♥ over 5♣-5♦. Partner knows how much they've shown, 5♦ shows extras.

Why does 5♦ show anything other than 1st round diamond control (if you cue 1st followed by 2nd round controls)? The cue bid hasn't taken the partnership past game (5♣ did that) or past the last bail out spot of 5♥.

[DavidKok]

AL78, on 2021-July-02, 02:54, said:

Why does 5♦ show anything other than 1st round diamond control (if you cue 1st followed by 2nd round controls)? The cue bid hasn't taken the partnership past game (5♣ did that) or past the last bail out spot of 5♥.

By bypassing keycards and 4♠ we are telling partner that controls are not the most likely issue. Therefore, at least as I play it, 5♣ on this auction is value-showing and asks partner for a strength-showing response in the context of the information shared so far. Partner bids 5♥ if the hand has become worse (presumably spade values), 5♦ with extras and can superaccept and show extra features with 5♠ and up as follows:

• 5♠ - first round spade control
  
• 5NT - extra values but not much extra shape, probably (semi)balanced with soft values
  
• 6♣ - a club fragment
  
• 6♦ - a sixth diamond (or really solid 5-card suit, impossible on this problem with our diamond holding), suggestion to play
  
• 6♥ - slam accept without extra features, about a queen stronger than 5♦

Edit: it occurred to me later that we should probably bid 6♦ over 5♦, instead of 6♥. This shows support and is a suggestion to play (any hand with aspirations for 7 can bid 5♠, 5NT or 6♣). If partner has 2=4=5=2 or 4=3=5=1 this is probably a better spot. Now let's hope partner pulls to 6♥ with the actual hand, and doesn't interpret this as a try for 7...

[Winstonm]

jillybean, on 2021-July-01, 23:15, said:

Partner will have first/second round control in ♦'s, and won't have a bare minimum.

This was the full hand

---

This shows to me the critical nature of trumps in slam bidding - with south bidding 3 spades, this slam is now less good but still reasonably good - but unless the 9-card fit is known the Jxxx trump support would make me reign in cooperation