[jillybean]

Well, so much for not having to post any more hands.

Over partners strong 2♣ opening, we have taken the approach of 'stay out of the way of the 2♣ bidder' and play 2♥ , no Ace or King. 2♦ is a waiting bid, as a general approach, we don't make a positive bid over 2♣.

---

[blackshoe]

Given your stated approach, I'd bid 2♦.

[mikeh]

2D for now. I do play suit positives over 2C but the club suit is too weak for that.

Slam is in the offing, but let’s see what partner does next

[neilkaz]

2♦ should be automatic for your style listed.

[jillybean]

---

A quantitative 4nt now?

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-March-08, 20:58, said:

---

A quantitative 4nt now?

You should have a way of showing a long minor over 2N

One easy treatment is to use 3S as a puppet to 3N, over which 4C/D show long clubs/diamonds and 4M shows shortness, with both minors. There are many treatments but this one is easy to remember

So I’d bid 3S, then 4C

This is not a hand for quantitative bidding

Opposite AQxx AKx Ax KQxx 7N is cold

Opposite AQJx KJx AKJx Kx you are unlikely to make any slam

Finding grand won’t be easy, but why not involve partner?

If partner isn’t good enough to trust, so what? Partners sometimes improve if you trust them and, when things don’t work out, have a discussion

Basically, any hand with Kxx or better in clubs will offer a good play for slam, and sometimes grand, while any doubleton club, other than KQ tight, rules out grand and makes even small slam dependent on good breaks

So ask partner whether he likes clubs.

[jillybean]

---

Can I assume 5♣ by South is a signoff, any other 5x bid is a forward going cue?

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-March-09, 00:19, said:

---

Can I assume 5♣ by South is a signoff, any other 5x bid is a forward going cue?

I would rarely expect 5C. The regressive move is 4N.

There are specialized methods available but they are a little esoteric. So I would expect opener to cue a control any time he likes clubs (Kxx would always like clubs, as an example..Qx would not (if responder has AKxxxx he'd either have responded 3C or he has extras, and so is driving to slam anyway).

Over 4D, I bid 4S. Over 4H, I bid 5C, since we are off the AK diamonds, not that I expect that to happen

[jillybean]

---

I know we have all the ♣keycards, I need to know if your ♠cue was the K or shortness. Can I assume it's the King (+ ♣Ace), since you have denied a ♦ control and without the ♠K you don't have the values to make a slam try.

I could continue 5♥ but I suspect that would be asking for first round ♠ control and the auction would end in 6♣
My other option is 4nt Keycard, followed by specific King ask. If you have the ♠K, I can bid 7N and hope ♣ don't split 4-0.

Going back to my bid over 4♣, 4N isn't a kaycard here because it is the cheapest bid that I have to deny slam interest?
If 4N is the regressive move, what is 5♣?

edit..correction, you haven't denied a ♦ control.

[DavidKok]

jillybean, on 2021-March-09, 02:22, said:

I know we have all the ♣keycards, I need to know if your ♠cue was the K or shortness. Can I assume it's the King (+ ♣Ace), since you have denied a ♦ control and without the ♠K you don't have the values to make a slam try.

I could continue 5♥ but I suspect that would be asking for first round ♠ control and the auction would end in 6♣
My other option is 4nt Keycard, followed by specific King ask. If you have the ♠K, I can bid 7N and hope ♣ don't split 4-0.

Going back to my bid over 4♣, 4N isn't a kaycard here because it is the cheapest bid that I have to deny slam interest?
If 4N is the regressive move, what is 5♣?

In my partnership we would bid as you have shown. You may not assume partner has the king of spades. Maybe North holds something like x, QJx, Kx, AJxxxxx and is worried about the hearts after hearing 4♦. Incidentally, this is why 2NT is often called the 'slam killer' (even if it goes through strong 2♣) - there is no room to safely explore minor suit slams below the game level, because often the suit is only introduced on the 4-level.
Anyway, the South hand is amazing. You have all these aces and kings, and ♣KQx is pretty much the strongest support possible. There's even ruffing potential in hearts. You don't care much for keycards (sure, partner will have the ♣A most of the time, and no others), so I would rebid 5♥. This would show some (super)maximum with solid controls (typically first round) in both red suits. It is fine, and in fact it is good bridge, to go past the game level here. If partner can't handle a slam opposite this monster they shouldn't have invited. Perhaps a better partnership would have agreements to show the ♠K over that call, or even anticipate this problem and bypass 4♦ to cue 4♥ into 5♦ after partner's sign-off, but this would not have occurred to me at the table.

Over 4♣ an immediate 4NT is not keycards for two reasons. Firstly if opener has poor club support it is likely NT plays better than clubs (5♣ would also be a sign-off but is extremely rare since is implies club support, and with club support on this auction you 'never' have a minimum. WIth aces and club support you have a positive, and without aces NT is probably better). Secondly if you want to ask for keycards opener can always cue first, get more information from partner and then blast keycards on the bid after. This even gives partner the option of taking captaincy with very shapely hands.

[Cyberyeti]

We would use 4♦ as keycard over 4♣.

We play 2♣-positive as F4N unless a suit is already known to be open and if responder bids 4N it's quantitative rather than signoff, so our negative 2♦ goes up a little higher than most when balanced.

That said we would bid either 2N or 3♣ rather than 2♦ with this. 2N has the advantage of denying a singleton so the spade cue is known to be the K later.

Playing what you play you need a way to ask for aces over 4♣.

[DavidKok]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-09, 04:56, said:

We would use 4♦ as keycard over 4♣.

Playing what you play you need a way to ask for aces over 4♣.

I'm confused, why does South need to ace-ask? At all, or at the first opportunity over 4♣ in particular?

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2021-March-09, 07:05, said:

I'm confused, why does South need to ace-ask? At all, or at the first opportunity over 4♣ in particular?

Because often that is all he needs to know when he has some sort of fit, and knowing whether your controls are high card or shortage can be critical.

[DavidKok]

Cyberyeti, on 2021-March-09, 07:13, said:

Because often that is all he needs to know when he has some sort of fit, and knowing whether your controls are high card or shortage can be critical.

This has not been my experience at all, with balanced 22-23 (or whatever the exact range is) hands I'm often in need of trick-taking potential, and much less interested in knowing if partner has one ace or two.

[Winstonm]

mikeh, on 2021-March-09, 01:19, said:

I would rarely expect 5C. The regressive move is 4N.

There are specialized methods available but they are a little esoteric. So I would expect opener to cue a control any time he likes clubs (Kxx would always like clubs, as an example..Qx would not (if responder has AKxxxx he'd either have responded 3C or he has extras, and so is driving to slam anyway).

Over 4D, I bid 4S. Over 4H, I bid 5C, since we are off the AK diamonds, not that I expect that to happen

Just a random thought. As Mike pointed out, 5C is this sequence is kind of a non-bid so the question then is, what would partner be trying to tell me with that bid if, indeed, it were made. One thought might be consolidated club values: KQJ. Then another thought along with that is that if 5C were bid to show consolidated values, the bidder must also be inferring first round controls of the outside suits, too. So, maybe AKx, AQx, Axxx, KQJ

I always thought these kinds of after-session discussions were a lot of fun and quite helpful. It is not about fine-tuning the system so that every bid is defined but about exchanging ways of thinking about a problem so that the partnership functions better.

Anyway, just a random thought.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2021-March-09, 07:22, said:

This has not been my experience at all, with balanced 22-23 (or whatever the exact range is) hands I'm often in need of trick-taking potential, and much less interested in knowing if partner has one ace or two.

That is true with some hands but not with others, AQx, AQx, AJxx, AQx there's a HUGE difference between Kx, Kx, xxx, KJxxxx and x, x, xxx, KJxxxxxxx whereas with AKQ, AKx, Axxx, Kxx there is much less of a difference whether the diamond control is K or stiff as long as partner has some values with compensating suit length if short of high cards.

This is my problem with overusing 2♦ waiting, you don't have the guarantee of say an 8 count that you do if you actually bid decent hands even if the suits are not great.

[Winstonm]

One method to limit the problems of the strong 2C opening is to limit the types of hands that are opened 2C - I would guess single-suiters and NT hands are a pretty healthy majority

[jillybean]

Winstonm, on 2021-March-09, 18:45, said:

One method to limit the problems of the strong 2C opening is to limit the types of hands that are opened 2C - I would guess single-suiters and NT hands are a pretty healthy majority

I agree, I am tending more and more to open 2C 2 suited hands 1x.

[Winstonm]

jillybean, on 2021-March-09, 21:30, said:

I agree, I am tending more and more to open 2C 2 suited hands 1x.

I think your decision is wise and shows growth as a player.


Way back when Bob and I devised a scheme based on the notion that 2C hands are normally either NT hands and partner becomes captain, or single-suited hands in which case what suits partner holds are of less interest.

Of interest in this scheme was the positive waiting response denied a singleton or void - so that opener, if single-suited, knew immediately if there was a playable fit in his presumed 6-card or longer suit. Immediate suit bids were positive and showed shortness.

Limiting the opening types this way allowed a relay-like method to show NT hands or single-suiters.

This post has been edited by Winstonm: 2021-March-10, 14:03

[jillybean]

Winstonm, on 2021-March-09, 22:36, said:

I think your decision is wise and shows growth as a player.


Way back when Bob and I devised a scheme based on the notion that 2C hands are normally either NT hands and partner becomes captain, or single-suited hands in which case what suits partner holds are of less interest.

Of interest in this scheme was the positive waiting response denied a singleton or void - so that opener, if single-suited, knew immediately if there was a playable fit in his presumed 6-card or longer suit. Immediate suit bids were positive and showed shortness.

Limiting the opening types this way allowed a relay-like method to show NT hands or single-suiters.

Thanks, & I like that addition to the 2♣ continuations. I will file that away for future reference when me, and a partner are ready for that level of sophistication.