[phil_20686]

---

What now?

EDIT : 2N= diamonds + hearts

[wank]

why is there no 4s option?

[dake50]

What now? -- 'phil_20686
.
*** What "partner did not choose 3C,3D,3H, ... " inferences do we get?
Tell us your agreements for those.
Are you asking "Within those agreements, what to do?"
OR "what agreements SHOULD we have?"
"Should agreements cater to strong 2-suiters or fly by the seat of our pants with these?"

*** I would like to hear from posters on their theory in answer to those.

[ahydra]

What was 2NT - D+M or 2 lowest, what range? Style of 4H bid (any strong raise available)? What's 4S here?

Assuming 4H actually showed something, not just pre-emptive, I'm definitely interested in slam but partner needs to know how to evaluate his hand. We need to do our best to tell him "you need good diamonds and/or the CA", i.e. a general "poke" of some sort rather than a specific question, so if 4S is available to cue spades that'd be my choice, otherwise 5C.

ahydra

[phil_20686]

I just forgot 4S was an option.

2N was diamonds + hearts always 100%.

[whereagles]

I'm lucky to have a very well defined 5♣ bid, so I'm going to use it. Plan is respect a 5♥ sign-off or bid 6♥ if pard cooperates with 5♦ showing stuff there.

[billw55]

Seems like a good time for keycard. If partner shows the ♣A and ♦K, I am bidding 7.

[gszes]

The 4h bid should be some hand that is primarily preemptive yet should have something
of interest (there was a preemptive 3h bid available). Sometimes toys will not give us
the information we need and we should not waste time messing around with them. We need
p to hold as little as xxx xxxx Qx xxxx to make us a huge favorite to make 6h and the
toys we have available will not get us enough information to bid 7 with condidence. That
being the case we should simply bid what we think we can make and bid

6h.

I REALLY like this hand btw:))))) deal me more of these

[PhilKing]

gszes, on 2014-August-06, 09:42, said:

We need
p to hold as little as xxx xxxx Qx xxxx to make us a huge favorite to make 6h

Only if we can lead from the wrong hand.

I quite like the bid though, but not as much as 6♣ - psychic exclusion RKCB to stop the lead. So I will join you in voting for "other".

[MrAce]

4 sp is the best among all IMO. We need either club A or some diamond coverage for slam. If pd cues 5 Cl we bid it, if he does not have Cl A, he can bid 5 dia and we still bid slam. With none of these he can bid 5 H which we pass. I don't think he is required to hold 1st round control to bid 5 dia in my known 2nd suit.

It's not % 100 guaranteed of course, dia shortness may also help depending on splits. But pd in my style of bidding is very capable of holding

KQx
Qxxxx
xx
xxx
Or similar hands where a club and a dia loser is not avoidable.

4 NT over 4 Sp cue is debatable.

[wanoff]

I prefer RKCB and it should be 6A RKCB. Sorry to state the obvious if that goes without saying.
If partner shows the 2 cards, I'll bid 6♦ asking for 3rd round control.

[phil_20686]

So I actually just decided to bid 6H on the deal. Partner usually has one useful feature here, and it doesnt need to be much for slam to have decent play. Partner actually has Kxx QT86x 4 8764, so slam is cold.


Helgemo and Helness floated 4H on an identical auction, so I wondered if pass was a reasonable choice.

[gszes]

PhilKing, on 2014-August-06, 14:48, said:

Only if we can lead from the wrong hand.

I quite like the bid though, but not as much as 6♣ - psychic exclusion RKCB to stop the lead. So I will join you in voting for "other".

''

One of those itsy bitsy hearts will probably act as an entry:)

[benlessard]

Helgemo and Helness floated 4H on an identical auction, so I wondered if pass was a reasonable choice.

Very weird indeed. Im pretty sure passing is not a reasonnable choice unless the michaels are always like 12+

[mikeh]

I couldn't have put it better than Timo so I won't try

Okay, I can't help myself. I think it a useful rule that in cuebidding auctions, cuebids below game are optional. A bidder who has nothing at all extra need not make a cuebid even if it is convenient to do so, provided that partner is also at least somewhat limited, as (for example) by having opened at the one level rather than 2♣.

The corollary is that once one partner cues beyond game, the other player MUST cue if a cue is available, and so here I would treat a 5♦ cue as 2nd or 1st round control, and this can (unusually for a cue in a suit in which partner is known to be long) be shortness, but only when holding unexpected trump length, as was the case here.

Incidentally, this approach shows why cue-bidding is so often superior, in terms of slam bidding, to asking for keycards.

[PhilKing]

Note that 6♥ makes an overtrick after we bid exclusion RKC.

It can't be worse than just leaping to six, and sometimes we stop the killing lead (we might even make it opposite the MrAce hand if opener has ♠JT9x or similar). I don't know why I give away this stuff, but any time you decide it's right to jump to slam, stop and think if there is a way to make the defence more difficult. As well as fake exclusion, we also have the corollary - RKC with a void, to make them asume an ace is cashing.

[gnasher]

PhilKing, on 2014-August-20, 18:03, said:

I don't know why I give away this stuff

I assume it's because you want people to make unsuccessful leads against you when you really do have a void for your Exclusion bid.