BBO Discussion Forums: how to bid this hand, slam bidding, - BBO Discussion Forums

South has opened 1 Heart.
West passes.
How should north bid this hand? East west are passing throughout.

North Holds
Spade J
Heart K T 5 3
D A K Q 9
C K Q 6 2

Should N bid, 4NT or Jacoby 2 NT, or Splinter 3 Spades?

Also, how should the bidding proceed, if south holds

Spade 9 7 3
H A Q 9 7 6 2
D 4
C A J 4

Thanks

If you have the ability to show a shortage after bidding Jacoby, then I would do that. However, standard common continuations do not have that, so if you start with Jacoby, partner with poor spades will be unable to judge that suit. In this case you are so strong that you will be driving the contract, not him, so this is not really a consideration.

A splinter is a possibility, if you do not have agreements on strength limits, but again you will be making the decisions, so it is not necessary.

Without the Jacoby followed by shortage, ace asking is fine. With an ace missing you will stop in 6, and with all 5 aces you will ask for kings and can see potentially 13 tricks with 5 hearts, 3 clubs, 3 diamonds, and 2 spade ruffs, assuming no useful unknown Qs or Js in his hand. Yes, there is no problem with immediate asking. (Not being able able to potentially count to 13 would be a deterrent.)

With the South hand and standard RKCB it would therefore go 1H 4NT, 5S 6H.

If your Jacoby continuations allow partner to show specifically a void in spades, then this is a better start, as it gives that extra option. Discover that, and then if no spade void, ace ask as above to end in 6. If he has a spade void, then you can bid 7.

I would recommend having the ability after Jacoby for responder as well as opener to show a shortage, then to be able to discover whether singleton or void beneath game. It is very useful.

1♥-4N-5♠-6♥ is a pretty sensible auction if you don't have detailed agreements about your Jacoby continuations.

Given that a decent number of players play that an immediate 4nt = regular blackwood, not RKC, it's probably way more sensible to bid Jacoby first. You don't really lose much by bidding Jacoby first, just a little bit of disclosure about opener's hand, and you avoid accidents.

Once South opens 1 ♥ a probable slam comes into view for North.

North should see that with a stiff ♠ and ♣ KQ there is no potential for 2 losers in any side suit. Typically, that will push North towards using the ace/keycard bid.

If North's hand were ♠ Jx ♥ K1053 ♦ AKQ9 ♣ KQ6, then before committing to slam North would need to assure there are not 2 ♠ losers. That would push the auction towards cue bidding so that a ♠ control could be identified before getting too high.

I agree with Cyberyeti's auction if South would interpret 1 ♥ - 4 NT as RKCB/1430. If not, Stephen Tu's comments are apropro. Just use Jacoby and follow it with RKCB. Perhaps,

1 ♥ - 2 NT
3 ♦ - 4 NT
5 ♠ - 6 ♥

Stephen Tu, on 2015-December-23, 19:54, said:

Decent is the exaggeration of the year.
A tiny number of expert partnerships might have this very special agreement.
Surely they will also be able to construct a few hands with a solid suit and a singleton in partners suit, where this agreement would come in handy.
Meanwhile 99% of all tournament players do not care about such silly agreements, which come up every second leap year at best, and live happily without them.

Rainer Herrmann

This thread is a bit relevant, where Justin says most people (but not him) think it should be regular Blackwood (at least in 2009):
http://www.bridgebas...c/34354-1z-4nt/
I agree that regular Blackwood is a bit silly but I don't think it's fair to say that 99% of people play RKC. Probably relatively few people actually discuss it and would interpet by default RKC when undiscussed, but I don't think regular Blackwood is played by such a vanishing number of people when we just consider people who've thought about it and discussed it specifically. Anyway there's some chance we actually agree but are talking about different things.

rhm, on 2015-December-24, 02:10, said:

Agree, and some of us will have the agreement that a SJS then blackwood is how we bid that hand type.

I started out writing that splintering on this hand is nuts, then persuaded myself otherwise. I think it's just about the range that if I splinter and P signs off, I still want to be in small (subject to enough KCs), and if I splinter and he encourages, I want to be in grand (with same caveat).

The only issue with immediate keycard is whether partner with 6 to the ace shows the Q he doesn't have. If your Jacoby or splinter guarantees 4 trumps, then that's a good reason for taking it slower.

Cyberyeti, on 2015-December-24, 06:06, said:

Good point - if Jacoby guarantees 4 card support then opener without the Q but having 6 cards can pretend he has the Q, on the 10 card fit. Start with Jacoby whatever your methods.

Blackwood or RKCB isn't the point, any partnership will know what they play. The important issue in my view is to have useful agreed follow-ups to Jacoby. Surprisingly many hands (not that Jacoby happens often) would like to know of shortage in either hand, and whether that is singleton or void is crucial when ace asking. Certainly an area for regular partnerships to look at once they have the more frequent bids buttoned up.

.

fromageGB, on 2015-December-24, 06:20, said:

Splinter is just as good if it shows 4.

We don't play Jacoby (2N is good 4+ card raise to 3 or better, immediate splinter is void), our auction would be 1♥-2N-4♥(showing a 6th heart and a min)-4♠(keycard) and now there is no need to show the absent Q as 6 cards have already been shown.

tendol, on 2015-December-23, 16:36, said:

1st: this is a system problem. in mine, 3c is a suit with h support, gf.

2nd: also a matter of system. in mine, 4d is single, at least 5 h's, 2+ key cards.

how easy this is, if you organize your bidding.

While North has a hand some might find too big for a splinter, I would splinter here without hesitation.
1♥ - (P) - 3♠ - (P)
4♣
When opener control bids clubs they confirm no wastage in spades. Now RKB gets us what we need to know.