[patroclo]

---

thanks
Gigi

[Tramticket]

A slam is likely to fail. Even with the king of diamonds favourably placed, a club lead and ruff will defeat the slam.

The exact auction will depend on you methods. If you play transfers in four suits, you will bid 2NT as a transfer to diamonds and partner will show a strong holding (some bid 3♦ to show this, others 3♣). You will then show a heart shortage (some can bid 3♥ to show a shortage, others will need to jump to 4♥). Cue-bidding will highlight the missing first-round control in clubs and since you are missing the king of diamonds you will stop in 5♦.

[The_Badger]

Tramticket, on 2017-July-28, 04:58, said:

The exact auction will depend on you methods.

Yes, Tramticket is spot on. The exact auction will depend on your methods. There are other bids like Minor Suit Stayman, etc. out there, too, but a popular method these days is for 3♦ to show at least 5-5 in the minors, and be game forcing.

Yes, a slam will fail on the right lead, but there's too much that needs to go right on this hand generally for slam to be a good bet. It's usually difficult to find key honours on these types of minor suited auctions I feel.

Even though you're good distributionally, there cannot be more than 26HCPs between the two hands, so that leaves a lot of gaps for Ace/King controls to be with opponents, and you're missing four of them in the minor suits already (looking from the East seat).

[ggwhiz]

Yes to all of the above.

Minor suit stayman is on my card so it would go 2♠ - 3♦ (opener bids 2nt without a 4 card minor) then 3♠ (we cue, others show shortness).

Opener has no cue or ambitions with a square 15 count so we will plutz into 5♦.

There are a couple of serious traps here. If opener bid 3nt over 3♠ or if responder had cued their heart void making openers King look like a good card towards a 3nt contract. We avoid most (not all) of these now after a LOT of trial and error.

[rmnka447]

Many players play 2 ♠ as a weak transfer to a minor contract. Opener bids 3 ♣ and responder passes or corrects to 3 ♦ to play there.

If so, then you can by partnership agreement define the following Stayman sequence

1 NT - 2 ♣
2 ♦ - 3 ♣

as showing a forcing hand with a ♣ suit or minor suit Stayman. If opener has less then 4 ♣, 3 ♦ has to be bid. Otherwise, opener can bid a major stopper confirming 4 ♣. (Opener's hand must have 7+ minor cards, so a 3 ♦ continuation must be either 3=3=4=3 or 5-3-3-2 with a 5 card ♦ suit.)

On the actual hands asked about, opener would rebid 3 ♦ and you should have no problem finding 5 ♦ from there.

[aawk]

Without any agreements it is hard to show your both minors.

If you play 2♠ and 2nt as transfer to ♣ and ♦ there is a way.

2s is a transfer for ♣ and 3 way forcing

(A) weak with a 6+ card ♣
(B) slam invite or better with a 6+ card ♣
© slam invite or better with a 5+ card ♣ and a 5+ card above being ♦, ♥ or ♠

2nt is a transfer for ♦ and 3 way forcing

(A) weak with a 6+ card ♦
(B) slam invite or better with a 6+ card ♦
© slam invite or better with a 5+ card ♦ and a 5+ card above being ♥ or ♠

After partners respond :

1nt - 2♠
2nt - ??

3♣ = weak to play (A)
3♦ = slam invite or better at least 5-5 in ♣/♦ ©
3♥ = slam invite or better at least 5-5 in ♣/♥ ©
3♠ = slam invite or better at least 5-5 in ♣/♠ ©
3nt = weak to play with AK, AQ or KQ in ♣ (A)
4♣ = slam forcing 6+ card ♣ (B)

1nt - 2♠
3♣ - ??

pass = weak to play (A)
3♦ = slam invite or better at least 5-5 in ♣/♦ ©
3♥ = slam invite or better at least 5-5 in ♣/♥ ©
3♠ = slam invite or better at least 5-5 in ♣/♠ ©
3nt = slam invite 6+ card ♣ (B)
4♣ = slam forcing 6+ card ♣ (B)

After 2nt as transfer for ♦ the same bidding methods are used.

[GrahamJson]

As others have already elaborated on, practiced partnerships will have a gadget for this type of hand.

If playing, say on BBO, with an unfamiliar partner I think I would bid a simple 5D with the east hand. Not ideal, but anything else risks ending up in a silly contract. However if I were playing with an unfamiliar partner but we had already played a few boards and established that we both knew what we were doing, then I would risk a 2S response followed by a jump to 4NT over partner's forced 2S (assuming playing SAYC or 2/1). I think it shouldn't be too difficult for partner to deduce that I must hold a big minor two suiter.

[gszes]

Arghhhh so MANY things to talk about I can't do it here. Short version, all those quacks make the 7 level such a tiny target as to be unreachable so this is primarily a choice btn the practical 3n and 5m (which might be safer). Showing both minors and the heart shortness will at least allow the partnership to avoid (and possibly bid a slam) 3N when it is a horrible contract. 3N is not horrible here but at least the partnership can bid a safer 5m. As long as the partnership has some method in place for stopping short of slam I think that's the easiest way to go.

[Tramticket]

gszes, on 2017-August-01, 12:36, said:

Arghhhh so MANY things to talk about I can't do it here. Short version, all those quacks make the 7 level such a tiny target as to be unreachable so this is primarily a choice btn the practical 3n and 5m (which might be safer). Showing both minors and the heart shortness will at least allow the partnership to avoid (and possibly bid a slam) 3N when it is a horrible contract. 3N is not horrible here but at least the partnership can bid a safer 5m. As long as the partnership has some method in place for stopping short of slam I think that's the easiest way to go.

I'm not looking at 3NT - even at pairs.