[mikeh]

han, on Feb 28 2008, 04:45 PM, said:

How does responder know that opener has the spade queen Mike? Would opener not cooperate without the spade queen but with (say) AQJxx in clubs and the diamond queen? Are you willing to gamble that partner either has the spade queen or it drops?

Valid points.

But I think I can plausibly address these concerns.

1. It would be a strange hand indeed that opened 1♠ and rebid 3♣ with 9xxxx in spades. I am not saying no such hand exists (98xxx Kx A AKQxx is one I'd bid that way IFF I chose to treat this as a 5-5, and I might well prefer to treat this as a 4=5). I am saying that it is a relatively low frequency occurence.

2. Bearing in mind that the odds favour opener holding the Q or (possibly) a very weak 6 card suit, responder, at the end, will know that the grand is probably AT WORST on picking up AKJ10 opposite xxxxx for no losers. Now, if the grand is AT BEST dependent on that, I would be one of the loudest voices saying that this is a bad grand (unless you think you are heavily outgunned/need a big comeback). But there is a world of difference between the two situations.

Having said that, I would not pretend that I, playing with either of my favourite partners, would actually have the auction I gave. For one thing, one of them insists on opening 5-5 blacks with 1♣ But I do think that it is a plausible relatively standard sequence and that we MIGHT have had the auction in the '1♠ opening' partnership. I will never actually know

[Fluffy]

voidwood is very pretty and all, but it has 2 problems you are ignoring: diamond control and lack of ♥K wich you seem to assume will be onside.


I tried myself and couldn't reach 7. But maybe my grandma would reach it with confidence

1♠-3♥
4♦-4NT
5♥-7♥

[Echognome]

I bid it with Jason. Only got to 6♠. We couldn't make the distinction between the actual hand and Qxxxx Kx x AKxxx, which also has 5=2=1=5 shape, 4 controls, the ♠Q, ♥K and two of the top 3 club honors. Tough hand!

[Echognome]

Oh and I guess I should ask Mike if my presented alternate hand bids the same way in his auction?

Not to be nit-picking, but we at least thought it was guessing at grand.

[Impact]

1S 1NT R
2D= 4+C 2H R
2S= 5+5+ 2NT R
3H= 5-2-1-5 3S R
4C= 4controls 4D R
4H= no SA/K 4S R
5S= 2 top3C, HK, SQ 7S

but in real life surely my opponents bid a few D - unless they are 5-5 ....

regards

[Gerben42]

Quote

If you bid 2NT or 2H first then you won't get to use it (unless playing with Gerben)

Or Fred . Improving 2/1 GF would go:

1♠ - 3♣ (cheapest JS is Jacoby)
3♥ (not minimum, only 5 ♠, with a shortness) - 3♠ (asks said shortness)
4♦ (Diamonds shortness)
...
- 7♠

P.S. I really like this 2/1 style, and it fits well in my system. Of course in Fantunes the S hand would be sold as "minimum with 5♠ and shortness" instead.

[mikeh]

Echognome, on Feb 28 2008, 09:01 PM, said:

Oh and I guess I should ask Mike if my presented alternate hand bids the same way in his auction?

Not to be nit-picking, but we at least thought it was guessing at grand.

Your alternate hand was Qxxxx Kx x AKxxx?


No, and it isn't even close. I would never consider a 3♣ rebid as opener. In fact, this hand, and the OP hand, demonstrate why many experts still require significant extra values for the high-level reverse. Doing so allows responder more comfort in slam auctions.

[Echognome]

mikeh, on Feb 29 2008, 07:25 AM, said:

Echognome, on Feb 28 2008, 09:01 PM, said:

Oh and I guess I should ask Mike if my presented alternate hand bids the same way in his auction?

Not to be nit-picking, but we at least thought it was guessing at grand.

Your alternate hand was Qxxxx Kx x AKxxx?


No, and it isn't even close. I would never consider a 3♣ rebid as opener. In fact, this hand, and the OP hand, demonstrate why many experts still require significant extra values for the high-level reverse. Doing so allows responder more comfort in slam auctions.

Qxxxx Kx x AKQJx?

I don't know. We rule out hands differently from standard. I just felt there were some alternatives.

[awm]

How about:

1♠ - 2NT(1)
3♦(2) - 3♥(3)
4♣(4) - 5♣(5)
5♦(6) - 5♥(7)
5NT(8) - 6♥(9)
7♠(10)

(1) Limit raise or better
(2) Shortness
(3) GF four-card raise; first or second round control of hearts
(4) Bad trumps (no 3♠ bid) but extras (no non-serious 3NT) and control of ♣
(5) 1st round ctrl at 5-lvl; denies ♦A or second top heart; promises good trumps
(6) 1st round control of ♦ (A or void)
(7) 1st-round control of hearts; cannot be ♥AK because of the 5♣ call
(8) Asking about trump qualify -- we have confirmed control of all suits
(9) Two of the top three spade honors (step response)
(10) Opener knows we have all suits controlled, all the top three trumps in a nine-plus card fit, and possible trick sources in hearts and/or clubs (if partner's 5♣ cue was ace).

[MarceldB]

Will 7♥ not be safer , waiting if you get from opponent eventually a Lightner double, so you will be able to correct to 7♠ ?

(I know... it will not work if your sneaky opponent with a void ♥ produces a fake Lightner double, knowing/gambling that you will correct to 7♠ , but how often will this happen?)

[Free]

Bid like a noob who knows exclusion blacky:
1♠ - 5♣ (opening - excl)
5♦ - 5♥ (1/4 - Q?)
6♥ - 7♥ (♠Q & ♥K - ♦ loser goes on the 5th ♠)

[Cascade]

Free, on Mar 4 2008, 09:35 PM, said:

Bid like a noob who knows exclusion blacky:
1♠ - 5♣ (opening - excl)
5♦ - 5♥ (1/4 - Q?)
6♥ - 7♥ (♠Q & ♥K - ♦ loser goes on the 5th ♠)

And if partner had no key-cards would you bid a small slam or not?

Sure this approach will get you to a grand slam with some confidence but won't always help you get to a small slam.

[louisg]

The following seems simple and straightforward, yet no one else has suggested it. Am I missing something?

1♠-2♥
3♣(1)-5♠(2)
5NT(3)-7♠

(1) Extras
(2) "Bid 6 with a diamond control"
(3) "Bid 7 with 2/3 top spades"

[louisg]

Quote

The following seems simple and straightforward, yet no one else has suggested it. Am I missing something?

1♠-2♥
3♣(1)-5♠(2)
5NT(3)-7♠

(1) Extras
(2) "Bid 6 with a diamond control"
(3) "Bid 7 with 2/3 top spades"

It occurs to me that 5NT here might be taken as showing the guarded DK, offering 6NT as a possible contract. Perhaps it would be better for opener to bid 6♥, which invites 7♠ and should show the HK as well as 1st round diamond control.

In any case, my main point was in the value of responder's 5♠ call.