[sathyab]

Scoring: IMP

---

pd you
--- ----
1c 1s
1nt 2d (2-way checkback GF, 3s would promise solid suit and set trumps)
2h 3c (undiscussed whether pd's 2h bid denies 3 spades)
3d - probably a cue-bid in support of clubs and likely denies 3 spades

Your agreement is that once you you agree on a minor suit, 4m is RKC. So 4c by you know would be RKC, as also 3s-3nt-4c. If partner has the top two club honors, 7c could be a decent spot if you can be sure that partner has at least 4 clubs. If he has only one honor without the Jack, regardless of whether he has four or five clubs, 6s might be superior as the two red kings in his hand might cover two losing clubs if spades come home. How do you proceed ?

[mike777]

sathyab, on Jun 3 2008, 03:23 AM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> AKTxxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> A </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> A </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> Q8xx </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

pd  you
---   ----
1c   1s
1nt  2d (2-way checkback GF, 3s would promise solid suit and set trumps)
2h   3c (undiscussed whether pd's 2h bid denies 3 spades)
3d    - probably a cue-bid in support of clubs and likely denies 3 spades

Your agreement is that once you you agree on a minor suit, 4m is RKC. So 4c by you know would be RKC, as also 3s-3nt-4c. If partner has the top two club honors, 7c could be a decent spot if you can be sure that partner has at least 4 clubs. If he has only one honor without the Jack, regardless of whether he has four or five clubs, 6s might be superior as the two red kings in his hand might cover two losing clubs if spades come home. How do you proceed ?

lets back up....3c i am lost....... what is that......just rebid 2s over 2h.....now proceed......I assume 2s is a slam try in spades......proceed now pls.....

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

3S instead of 2D is certainly better, you know,
you have 9 trumps, i.e. you have a brilliant fit,
as long as partner does not bid 1NT with 1345.

It will simplify the auction a lot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mike777]

P_Marlowe, on Jun 3 2008, 03:50 AM, said:

Hi,

3S instead of 2D is certainly better, you know,
you have 9 trumps, i.e. you have a brilliant fit,
as long as partner does not bid 1NT with 1345.

It will simplify the auction a lot.

With kind regards
Marlowe

see other threads we cannot assume p would not rebid 1nt with this...see other threads. ty....

But we can assume p would not rebid 2h over 2d with this
this is an easy 3d on this auction.....

[FrancesHinden]

I don't get the 3C bid.
What was wrong with 2S over 2H? Do we not have 7 of them?

[Codo]

Of course I agree that 2 Spade had been better then 3 Club, but that is not the question.
I will go for 3 Spade now
I continue with 4 Club after 3 NT , 6 club after 4 ♦ or ♥ and 4 NT after 4 Spade.

[jdonn]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 3 2008, 04:03 AM, said:

I don't get the 3C bid.
What was wrong with 2S over 2H? Do we not have 7 of them?

I see my thoughts were already covered.

[OleBerg]

I agree with 3♣.

If 3♦ is really a cuebid with clubs, I feel 4♣ is standout.

When partner shows one ace, with 4♥ I presume, I bid 4nt. This invites slam, but as I have bypassed a possible cue-sequence, I am interested In values that cannot be cuebid, namely strenght in trumphs.

The same goes for 4♠, upon which I bid 5nt.

Does partner reply 5nt, I naturally bid 7, as he must have EKxxx in ♣. (Not even clear that that is enough.)

[sathyab]

jdonn, on Jun 3 2008, 08:24 AM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jun 3 2008, 04:03 AM, said:

I don't get the 3C bid.
What was wrong with 2S over 2H?  Do we not have 7 of them?

I see my thoughts were already covered.

I think the 3c bid expressed trump support early (may have turned out to be premature had partner's clubs been not real and partner may think you have more than four clubs to the Queen). Yes 2s is definitely more reasonable. The auction would most likely proceed

1c-1s
1nt-2d
2h-2s
2nt-3c
3d

You're pretty much back to the same situation as stated in the problem originally.

[jdonn]

sathyab, on Jun 3 2008, 10:44 AM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 3 2008, 08:24 AM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jun 3 2008, 04:03 AM, said:

I don't get the 3C bid.
What was wrong with 2S over 2H?  Do we not have 7 of them?

I see my thoughts were already covered.

I think the 3c bid expressed trump support early (may have turned out to be premature had partner's clubs been not real and partner may think you have more than four clubs to the Queen). Yes 2s is definitely more reasonable. The auction would most likely proceed

1c-1s
1nt-2d
2h-2s
2nt-3c
3d

You're pretty much back to the same situation as stated in the problem originally.

I disagree. We would know partner is almost certainly 2434 exactly, and he would know we have extra spade length. It also creates different inferences for the rest of the auction, for example the 3♦ bid is in a different context if partner has already bid 2NT.

Anyway in the given problem situation 3♠ seems obvious.

[kenrexford]

Hands like this are interesting. This one, particularly so because the club suit is Qxxx. The analysis of Kxxx or Axxx is more complicated because of the value of two red Kings from Opener. I'll leave that alone for a second.

The key here is on deciphering partner's contribution as to club length and as to the critical missing cards, namely the AK of clubs and the spade Queen. Also critical to this is tactics and systemic agreements that prefer major-oriented auctions over minor-oriented auctions, to a degree.

Keeping these concerns in mind, and although I appreciate the thinking by focusing clubs, this sequence for me is a lot easier if I focus spades, and I'll explain.

After the GF is established, I could, as mentioned, bid 3♠, settiong trumps and requesting cues. That would be tremendous, as partner's first cue option is 3NT (serious, which contextually must feature all three critical cards if red-aceless) or 4♣, which for me shows two of the top three clubs (hence, the missing A-K). Then, 4NT clarifies the spade Queen problem.

The club problem is easier if 2♦ has the default I use (show spade 3-card support before secondary hearts), because the 2♥ call, then, would guarantee four clubs. As it is, 3433 is possible, which is a problem.

Thus, after learning of the club K-Q but learning of the lack of the spade Q, 7♣ looks like the right call.

The problem, though, for the actual auction is lacking that major shape limitation, which creates the problem on this hand. So, trying 3♣ has some merits, maybe. Let's play it out, though. You bid 4♣ and find out about the club AK (when 7 is in picture). I assume that at any point one could blast some spade call to play, even after focusing clubs? But, how does one inquire as to the spade Queen?

Better is to cue 3♥. If partner cues 3♠ as I play this shows one of the top three spades (the Queen), and again the problem is solved, as to the honors ("ask" about the spades by bidding 3♥ and then kick into 4♣ RKCB planning on placing the right contract). The problem, though, is that Opener may well have three spades. I'd imagine that 2♦...3♣ is your sequence with GF club support even with only four spades, right?

In sum, then, some relativbely minor tweaking of your agreements would have great impact for cases like this. Some decent cuebidding style also resolves two-suit scenarios like this well.

[sathyab]

kenrexford, on Jun 3 2008, 01:44 PM, said:

Hands like this are interesting.  This one, particularly so because the club suit is Qxxx.  The analysis of Kxxx or Axxx is more complicated because of the value of two red Kings from Opener.  I'll leave that alone for a second.

The key here is on deciphering partner's contribution as to club length and as to the critical missing cards, namely the AK of clubs and the spade Queen.  Also critical to this is tactics and systemic agreements that prefer major-oriented auctions over minor-oriented auctions, to a degree.

Keeping these concerns in mind, and although I appreciate the thinking by focusing clubs, this sequence for me is a lot easier if I focus spades, and I'll explain.

After the GF is established, I could, as mentioned, bid 3♠, settiong trumps and requesting cues.  That would be tremendous, as partner's first cue option is 3NT (serious, which contextually must feature all three critical cards if red-aceless) or 4♣, which for me shows two of the top three clubs (hence, the missing A-K).  Then, 4NT clarifies the spade Queen problem. 

The club problem is easier if 2♦ has the default I use (show spade 3-card support before secondary hearts), because the 2♥ call, then, would guarantee four clubs.  As it is, 3433 is possible, which is a problem.

Thus, after learning of the club K-Q but learning of the lack of the spade Q, 7♣ looks like the right call.

The problem, though, for the actual auction is lacking that major shape limitation, which creates the problem on this hand.  So, trying 3♣ has some merits, maybe.  Let's play it out, though.  You bid 4♣ and find out about the club AK (when 7 is in picture).  I assume that at any point one could blast some spade call to play, even after focusing clubs?  But, how does one inquire as to the spade Queen?

Better is to cue 3♥.  If partner cues 3♠ as I play this shows one of the top three spades (the Queen), and again the problem is solved, as to the honors ("ask" about the spades by bidding 3♥ and then kick into 4♣ RKCB planning on placing the right contract).  The problem, though, is that Opener may well have three spades.  I'd imagine that 2♦...3♣ is your sequence with GF club support even with only four spades, right?

In sum, then, some relativbely minor tweaking of your agreements would have great impact for cases like this.  Some decent cuebidding style also resolves two-suit scenarios like this well.

Thanks for getting to the crux of the problem eventhough I complicated matters by presenting an auction that prematurely raised clubs.

If you try 3s, partner's 3nt would be serious for most partnerships that play serious 3nt, but it's not clear that 4c would promise two top honors. The opposite of serious 3nt is a hand that's cue-bidding something below game in case that's what partner is looking for. Even if you agree that he'd bid 4c with two of the top three honors, he'd probably have to just bid 4s with only one of them or perhaps cue-bid 4h. All you know at this point is that you will settle for 12 tricks, but still don't know whether partner has a hand like

1) xx KQxx Kxx Axxx OR
xx KQxx Kx Axxxx OR
xx Kxxx KQx Axxx

in which case 6s is is a great spot as your partner's red suit honors cover three of losing clubs OR

2) Jx Kxxx Kx AJxxx OR
Jx KJxx Kx KJxxx

in which case 6c is where you want to be in case you have a spade loser.

If your focus has been spades mainly is there a reasonable way to get to 6s when partner holds hands like the one in (2) ?

[kenrexford]

Q: How to get to the right spot if Opener cannot cue 3NT (serious) or 4♣ (because only one of top three club honors)?

The key is in finding out whether he has three red cards (6♠) or good clubs but less than three red cards (6♣), when he lacks the spade Queen.

One possible route is actually a zooming call. After a red cue, blast 5NT. This is a strange call but should be choice. The choice should be, IMO, between spades and the other focus suit. The other focus suit is obviously clubs. If Opener, who has denied two of the top three clubs, is asked to assess between 6♣ and 6♠, he should be able to figure out what to do.

With the spade Queen, it is obvious.

With no spade Queen, he will look at his clubs and red cards. If he has pitches for club losers in the form of red depth, 6♠. If not, but decent clubs contextually, 6♣.

[peachy]

sathyab, on Jun 3 2008, 03:23 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

---

pd you
--- ----
1c 1s
1nt 2d (2-way checkback GF, 3s would promise solid suit and set trumps)
2h 3c (undiscussed whether pd's 2h bid denies 3 spades)
3d - probably a cue-bid in support of clubs and likely denies 3 spades

Your agreement is that once you you agree on a minor suit, 4m is RKC. So 4c by you know would be RKC, as also 3s-3nt-4c. If partner has the top two club honors, 7c could be a decent spot if you can be sure that partner has at least 4 clubs. If he has only one honor without the Jack, regardless of whether he has four or five clubs, 6s might be superior as the two red kings in his hand might cover two losing clubs if spades come home. How do you proceed ?

At some point, the 7-card spade should be revealed. The sooner the better.