[pescetom]

MP, West is dealer.

---

A spectacular but high numbered board in a national simultaneous tournament.
Out of 34 pairs who did play it, 7 were in 6♣+1, 6 in 6NT+1, 1 in 7♣= and 4 in 7NT=.
Plus 6 in 3NT+4 and 3 in 6♥-n.
How would you (honestly) have faired and reasoned during the bidding?

[smerriman]

Playing with a second me I would probably go..

1♠ - 2♣
2♥ - 3♣
3♦ - 4♣

(don't think I could bid 3nt opposite a potential void)

If I remembered what keycard I play with me at that point, then that will show AKQ and at least 12 top tricks, and plenty of chances for more.. (But no idea how honest this is.)

[mw64ahw]

smerriman, on 2024-March-20, 22:12, said:

Playing with a second me I would probably go..

1♠ - 2♣
2♥ - 3♣
3♦ - 4♣

(don't think I could bid 3nt opposite a potential void)

If I remembered what keycard I play with me at that point, then that will show AKQ and at least 12 top tricks, and plenty of chances for more.. (But no idea how honest this is.)

4♥ odd KCs K♥ - 4♠ nominally K♠, but here temporising
4NT K♦ - 7NT East can count the tricks

[Douglas43]

Probably 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♦*-4NT and now 6NT at pairs or 6♣ at teams

* fourth suit forcing at Acol


Or 3NT-6NT if East is dealer

[Cyberyeti]

Douglas43, on 2024-March-21, 02:50, said:

Or 3NT-6NT if East is dealer

3N-4♦(shortage ask)-4♠-5N(tell me more)-7♣ (extra club)-7N you would also pick up either red queen by this method

We play 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♣ forcing so would start like that then continue 3♦-4♣-4♦(kickback)-5♠(2 with and a spade void) and now it's guesswork, but I guess if W doesn't bid the slam directly and asks for more, E with potentially two more clubs than he needs to have (how do you bid xx, xx, xxx, AKQJxx) will bid 7♣ and W may bid 7N or may not.

(edit) Serves me right for posting while distracted, actually we wouldn't bid quite like that, we'd start 1♠-2♣-2N(GF not necessarily bal)-3♣-3♥-4♣ and then the same from 4♦ on.

[thepossum]

I have no idea, but my old friend Qplus Demo ended in 6NT+1. How does that fare?

Sorry 1S-P-2C!-P (gf clubs)
2H-P-3D!-P (guessing 4sf - sorry no already GF)
4D!-P-5C-P (guessing stoppers - no idea)
6NT-P-P-

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2024-March-20, 22:12, said:

Playing with a second me I would probably go..

1♠ - 2♣
2♥ - 3♣
3♦ - 4♣

I think almost all of us would have started that way, although in my club some complicated things further by bidding 3♥ rather than 2♥, and others bid a unilateral and optimistic Plain Blackwood as Responder (which would actually have worked in this case, had they continued to ask number of Kings and drawn the correct conclusion).

But after 4♣, the partnership needs precise agreements which are often missing. Did the third club bid set trumps? Whether or not so, what would 4♦, 4♥, 4♠, 4NT now mean?

I do not play that trumps are set, but luckily 4♦ has to be a control-bid setting trumps, except in the partnership where it would be RKCB(♣), which would probably lead us to 6NT if I bid that way.
In most other partnerships I am more likely to raise hearts after 3♦ and control-bid in the proxy suit, which again requires precise partnership agreements to not end up in 6♥ or problems of disclosure.
In one eccentric partnership we would open 2NT and then blast the clubs, which mikeh would rightly deprecate, but it delivers the eggs as often happens

[smerriman]

pescetom, on 2024-March-21, 16:53, said:

except in the partnership where it would be RKCB(♣), which would probably lead us to 6NT if I bid that way.

7NT, surely - unless you think partner has repeated clubs 3 times with a six card suit, you have 12 top tricks, plus a 13th if they have an 8th club, or a red queen, or the spade king, or at the very worse a heart finesse, or maybe some squeezes if none of those apply..

But yes, knowing which bids are what in this sequence is obviously the bit that comes down to good agreements.

[shyams]

Does anyone play a jump repeat by responder to be solid (7-trick) suit and a GF hand?

A long time ago, a friend and I had a sequence that began 1♥-2♣; 2♥-4♣ etc. I don't recall the result etc; I remember the incident because partner had a perfect ♣AKQJT98 suit and he showed it to all four of us at the table after the deal was played.

[mikeh]

I think fairly standard bidding should start 1S 2C 2H 4C

1S is normal unless playing a forcing club sort of method. 2C gf…despite the void in partner’s suit, we can hardly not force to game with 8 tricks in our hand


2H….there’s no need to jump (and many, including me, would play 3H as a splinter, but jumping is silly when one has no idea of what fit one has, if any)

4C is the standard way of showing a long, solid club suit. It would always be AKQJxx or better, and have stuff outside if only 6 cards long

Opener now has a truly enormous hand.

Methods are important and it is useful to play kickback here, but old fashioned 4N keycard works as well so I’ll show that

1S 2C 2H 4C 4N 5S 5N

5N promises all the keycards. Opener can’t just have the 3 aces to take charge. He doesn’t need the monster he has but he definitely has enough that responder can expect 7C to be somewhere between needing a little luck or being cold. Opener thinks he can place the contract simply by asking for keycards and then kings. So he has to have extra playing strength as well as the 3 aces. With less, he’d cuebid….clubs are trump after 4C.

Opener could, at mps or BAM, reasonably convert to 7N…if responder thinks he’s got 13 tricks, opener certainly seems to have enough to convert to the higher scoring grand.

I suspect that many players aren’t familiar with this usage of responder’s second round jump rebid. It only arises if the auction is already forced to game….it’s analogous to something like 1S 2D 3S by opener, but most wouldn’t play 3S as a no loser suit…just a very good suit. Even closer is 2C 2D 3H or 3S….they say….my suit is solid, don’t worry about trumps.

The rationale is that in a forcing auction, jump rebids take up a lot of valuable bidding space so ought to be both rare and very specific (being so specific compensates for the loss of a full round of bidding space).

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2024-March-22, 00:35, said:

4C is the standard way of showing a long, solid club suit. It would always be AKQJxx or better, and have stuff outside if only 6 cards long

Thanks for this. The notes on our system do not define it and I always assumed it should be imposition of trumps requesting a control-bid, with a long but not necessarily solid suit. I agree that solid is a good way of using useful space. Will check out with the author of the system whether he is on the same wavelength.

[nullve]

pescetom, on 2024-March-23, 13:34, said:

I always assumed it should be imposition of trumps requesting a control-bid, with a long but not necessarily solid suit.

That's the way it should be played, since

1♠-2♣
2♥-3♣
any-4♣

doesn't set clubs as trumps.

[pescetom]

 nullve, on 2024-March-23, 13:44, said:

That's the way it should be played, since

1♠-2♣
2♥-3♣
any-4♣

doesn't set clubs as trumps.

As promised I checked out agreements here with the author of our Italian 2/1 system.

He agreed with you (and I) that the above sequence does not set clubs as trumps and therefore 4NT by Opener would now be natural and negative. He also agreed with me that any further suit bid by Opener must be a control-bid accepting clubs as trumps (after 3♦, even repetition of a major cannot be natural).

As for:
1♠-2♣
2♥-4♣
he considered (as I imagined) that it should be imposition of trumps, which could reasonably request a control-bid although he himself would play it as Minorwood. He didn't comment the idea that it should also promise a solid suit.

[pescetom]

Out of curiosity, I also polled Responder's rebid on that other forum with results:

3♣: 18 votes (69%)
4♣: 6 votes (23%)
5♣: 2 votes (8%)

[mikeh]

pescetom, on 2024-March-26, 12:18, said:

Out of curiosity, I also polled Responder's rebid on that other forum with results:

3♣: 18 votes (69%)
4♣: 6 votes (23%)
5♣: 2 votes (8%)

Polls are of limited value. What I find useful are features such as The MasterSolvers Club in The Bridge World. Everyone who votes is an actual expert, and some are truly world class. They always provide some reasoning behind their choices and another WC expert moderates the discussion. I usually, but not always, agree with the action given top scoring, even (indeed sometimes especially) if my choice, before reading the analysis, was something different.

The BW poll has no criteria for who can comment, and the great majority of even those who read BW are not experts and only one voter (who chose 4C to show a solid suit) gave any reason.

That’s not to say that 3C is a bad call….my 4C is definitely an overbid on the hand outside of the club suit and I could easily reach a silly contract, with 3N cold (but one can’t assess the votes for 3C without knowing what each voter tended to bid over partner’s probable 3N).

[pescetom]

mikeh, on 2024-March-26, 12:23, said:

Polls are of limited value. What I find useful are features such as The MasterSolvers Club in The Bridge World. Everyone who votes is an actual expert, and some are truly world class. They always provide some reasoning behind their choices and another WC expert moderates the discussion. I usually, but not always, agree with the action given top scoring, even (indeed sometimes especially) if my choice, before reading the analysis, was something different.

The BW poll has no criteria for who can comment, and the great majority of even those who read BW are not experts and only one voter (who chose 4C to show a solid suit) gave any reason.

That’s not to say that 3C is a bad call….my 4C is definitely an overbid on the hand outside of the club suit and I could easily reach a silly contract, with 3N cold (but one can’t assess the votes for 3C without knowing what each voter tended to bid over partner’s probable 3N).

Sure, I agree about the limitations of such a poll.
Also, another voter who chose 4C was sfi
It does have the advantage that I can follow up the next level of bidding with another poll, which I shall do.

As for the ideal meaning of 4C, I'm still on the fence. A solid suit is attractive but so is the ability to impose trumps in a misfit. If you could submit this hand to The Bridge World for MasterSolvers discussion and report back on any conclusions I would be very grateful.

[BTW, the "mikeh" forum bug is still alive and well]

[sfi]

I'm pretty comfortable with calling this a solid suit (which sets trumps unless West does something unusual, like jump to slam). Even if partner has a void we're somewhere around 73% to bring the suit home, and I'm going to have a hard time convincing partner that clubs is trumps if I don't bid 4C now. Sure we give up on playing 4 of either major, but I can live with that here.

Do I get to the grand? There's a lot of room to explore and West normally has the luxury of 4D key card in my partnerships (in one 4C is already asking for key cards, despite my best efforts to change the system). That should give a couple of chances for West to say "really - think about the grand" even if East for some reason is feeling guilty.