coping with modern

[kenberg]

Donna had some lesson hands to day. One would have been easier in the old days.

I do not recall vul or form of scoring but I don't think it matters. Suppose you are dealt a 3=3=3=4 hand with an 18 count. Your partner opens 1 and you rho passes. You so what?

In the old days referred to above, you bid 2NT. This showed a balanced hand, not passable. far more often than not, partner will raise to 3NT. Then you can bid 4NT, showing this strength. Or, since you have four clubs, you could bid a natural 4 , after which opener can sign off in 4NT or start cueing to see if a slam might be there. With a 14 count and a bit of shape, 6 might be a fine contract. If the flat 18 seems a little light for this wait for 19 or a good 18, with some tens, say.

Ok, in modern times this plan is out since 1 - 2NT is passable. So now what?

It seems to me that 1 -2 would be fine in preparation  for a 4 NT bid at responder's. Yes, partner will think you have five clubs when you bid 2 but he could rethink that when you rebid 4NT. And even if he does not rethink that, he is not going to pursue a club slam if he started with three cards, and the club slam may be just fine if we have a 4-4 club fit.

So I think this is reasonable. But, as was said at the time, there needs to be agreement.

Mostly my point is that the modern agreement, with 1 - 2NT being passable, leaves a gap where the old style auction could go 1 - 2NT-3NT-4NT for a balanced slam invitation.

Your thoughts?

[jcreech]

Like so many times I get asked bidding questions, my answer is depends.  I would want partner to limit their hand and give me some indication of shape. 

If I were playing with one of my long-ago partners, this would be easy.  The club would be a one-round force with a semi-automatic 1 temporizing bid.  Now partner's bid would tell me if he was balanced, along with HCP range, or unbalanced with clubs as his longest suit.

Now I have to worry about whether the partnership style is to bid up the line or will bypass a longer diamond suit in order to bid a major with a minimum hand.

Let's work with the second style first.  If I were to bid a diamond, I essentially deny a four-card major unless I have extras, so partner's responsibility is to either show a balanced hand with some level of NT or to show an unbalanced hand.  Regardless, the bidding has become simplified - we are either trying for a slam in NT or we have two possible strains (clubs or NT) with a yet to be explored level.

Now to the up-the-line style.  This style does not work well with this sort of hand, so Ken's 1 - 2 is the best start.  However, partner's rebids are not so clearly range-bound, and you have a hand that is difficult to describe the HCPs to partner.  I think each will be flailing, and so the partnership may fail to find the right level and strain.

[Masse24]

I have no problem responding 1 with the hand you describe. I consider it normal to do so.

[kenberg]

Either 1 or 2 seems reasonable to me. With the hand in question, I think after  it would go 1 - 1 - 1NT. Then? And if I held opener's hand that after 1 - 2 I would bid a very passable 3 . As I recall it was a 3=3=2=5, and with pretty minimal count.


Slam makes, but it needs some luck to come in.   There is a 9 card club suit missing the Q. It drops.  The spades are AQx opposite three small. The K is onside. With five club tricks and two spades, we need  5 more from the red suits. They are there but I don't recall whether they are just sitting there ready to go. or if there is some back up plan available if either the K is offside or the don't come in w/o loss. Anyway, you can't just spread the cards and claim.