[gszes]

Before we trot out a convention (lets say 1n 5n asking p to bid
6 with a min or 7 near the top) we need to make sure it is the
right time to use that particular covnention. Here we will make 7N
if p has as little as spade K heart A and a minor K and this means p
will stop in 6 with a whole ton of hands including the above cards
and anything resembling a minimum. Once you look at the problem
this way you will see that 5n quant is not the way to go because
there are far too many instances where the grand will not be reached.

Since it is reasonable to be missing an ace (we have btn 34-37 hcp),
bidding 1n 7n seems irresponsible since making 7 will probably be
impossible missing the heart A.


IMO this hand is best handled using a simple A/K asking sequence
(any of them will do as long as it asks for aces then kings in some way
shape or form). The reason this works is that when we ask for aces
and p shows one and then ask for kings---opener will be able to leap to
7n with a surprise source of tricks (ie KQJx in either minor). If p has
only 1 K (and no surprise source of tricks) 7 is probably a poor idea
anyway at best on a finesse or a squeeze. If p has 2 kings 7 should be
impossible to stop.

Now how do we ask for aces after a 1n opening.

Gerber if agreed is the easiest.
Blackwood is possible but care must be taken to ensure p will not interperet
your ace asking bid with quantitative. Those of you that play Texas Transfers
have the easiest method. 1N Texas followed by 4n is your favorite form of
Blackwood while 1N Jacoby followed by 4n is quantitative.

[Zelandakh]

When I learned to play bridge, admittedly from Culbertson, 1NT - 4NT and 1NT - 5NT were both quantitative invites. But here with a 7 card self-supporting suit it seems like a silly approach to take. Instead I cannot see why we do not just invite partner to cue bid. In UK Standard, one could simply reply 3♥ and then we can ask for key cards and kings after hearing a control bid or two. My own variation on that would be to use the multi-way 2♠ after a transfer:

1NT - 2♦
2♥
... - 2♠ = range ask or clubs or strong one-suiter
2N = min
... - 3♥ = strong 1-suiter
4♥ = serious (for a minimum), controls in all side suits
... - 4♠ = RKCB
4N = 1 or 4 key cards
... - 7N

If you do not think Opener should accept the slam try then

... -
3♠ = non-serious
... - 3N = spade asking bid
4♠ = controls in all side suits, 1 key card
... -
reaches the same point.

On the other hand, perhaps I should just Texas and key card like everyone else.


In other news, Don, one possibility is to play 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 4♠ as Baron with a 5♥440 hand, although most can probably handle this another way. Another would be to play it as Voidwood, thus freeing up 1NT - 4♦; 4♥ - 4NT to be Voidwood excluding the ♦A...but only if you can manage not to forget!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

jillybean, on 2012-December-12, 22:37, said:

Partner's hand?

---

Beautiful!

EDIT : I mistakenly had the 3D! and 3H! reversed... corrected now .
Zel.... this is what I came up with awhile back to deal with Responder holding a GF LONG Major:

1NT - 2D!
2H - 3C! ( either real 2nd suit, 4+♣ OR Long ♥ only )
??
.. 3D! = 1st step, agrees ♣ ( 4 or 5 cards ♣ )
.. 3H! = 2nd step, agrees Major ( ♥ here )
.. 3S! = 3rd step, agrees BOTH
..3NT! = agrees Neither
after:
3S! - ??
......... 3NT! = long ♥ hand, start cuebidding
.......... 4C! = 2-suiter w/real ♣-suit, need cuebids
.......... 4D! = 6 Ace RKC
after:
.... - 3NT! ( ♥ )
4C - 4S! ( kickback-RKC )
5C ( 1/4 ) - 5S! ( specific K-ask )
5NT ( ♠ K ) - 7NT ( no need to make a 2nd K-ask )

[Zelandakh]

I use 3♣ as a comparable 2-way after a 2♥ transfer but the follow-ups I have settled on are slightly different:

1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♣ = diamonds or strong one-suiter
==
3♦ = 2 spades, 4+ diamonds
3♥ = 2 spades, <4 diamonds
3♠ = 3+ spades, <4 diamonds (spades agreed)
others = 3+ spades, 4+ diamonds (spades agreed)

The problem with 3♦ agreeing the major is that when partner bids 3NT and you hold the one-suiter, you have effectively preempted yourself from getting in the control bids you took this route for. There is a similar problem over your 3♥ too, albeit less acute. When you use 3♣ in combination with hearts, there is no easy solution to this since you only have one bid below 3♥ but 2 hand types without a heart fit. One solution might be for 3♦ (over 3♣) to show any hand wthout spade fit, then 3♥ is the one-suiter and 3♠ shows clubs. That obviously gives you much less space in club-fit auctions than using 2♠ for this though.

Out of interest, what do you need 2♠ for after a heart transfer? I cover the 5♥4♠ invite hands with 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 2NT; the 5♥5♠ GF hands with (inter alia) 1NT - 2♦; 2♥ - 3♦ and the 5♥5♠ invite hands with 1NT - 2♥; 2♠ - 3♥. I know some folks use it to cover a range of invitational hands and that is certainly a reasonable approach. It seems like a waste of an important sequence to make it non-forcing though.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Zel:

I use 3D as the natural 2-suiter w/♦ ( no "multi" meaning as with 3C ) :

1NT - 2transfer
2M - 3D

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Also, note to the correction in my previous post # 43 .

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Also, you have a valid concern of the 3NT = agreeing neither when responder has the long ♥ hand. Possibly could be solved with another "multi" ??

1NT - 2transf
2M - 3C!
3D! = either agree ♣ or agree neither