[mike777]

Scoring: MP

P=P=P=2C
P=2D!=P=2NT
P=3C=P=3S
P=??

---

2D=RANDOM ACES OR KINGS
edit: assume 2nt=22-24

[pbleighton]

Assuming 2NT is 22-24 with no 5 card major, 4S.

3NT is a decent bid at MPs, but I don't really care for it.

A slam or slam try is too hopeful IMO, with flat opposite flat and a combined 30-32 hcp.

Peter

[mikeh]

It would be useful to know if we have an agreement as to the upper limit of 2N: for me it is 22-24. I say this because we have some slam interest opposite a great 24 and more opposite 25-26 counts.

However, if he has real extras, then he can take another call: at least he may be able to.

So the question to me is whether to bid 4♠ or 3N. And this is a no-brainer at any form of scoring: I bid 3N.

There are many, many layouts where a bad trump break defeats 4♠ with 3N on ice.... with fewer where the opps can run 8 tricks before we run 9. So at imps, 3N rates to be the safer contract (btw, I would stayman because I would play in ♥s if he showed them).

At mps, we have not only the consideration that 3N is safer, we also have the consideration that we will often take the same number of tricks in notrump as in ♠s... all the signs are there: two balanced hands with extra high card. My rule of thumb for choosing 3N over a 4-4 major fit is: 1) my support is weak (xxxx qualifies), 2) I have no xx holding and 3) our combined assets are a minimum of 28 hcp.... thus we rate to take our tricks via high winners rather than low ruffs.

[FrancesHinden]

3NT
But I would rather have raised 2NT to 3NT and played there even with a heart fit.

[pclayton]

Wouldn't 4♥ be a generic slam try here?

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Jan 24 2007, 02:12 PM, said:

Wouldn't 4♥ be a generic slam try here?

It would be for me, but this isn't the hand for it

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Jan 24 2007, 11:16 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 24 2007, 02:12 PM, said:

Wouldn't 4♥ be a generic slam try here?

It would be for me, but this isn't the hand for it

Don't disagree, but obviously there are many hands where 6♠ is gin.

[whereagles]

If 4♥ would unquestionably be taken by pard as "heart control, slam try in spades", I would bid that. Otherwise just a plain 4♠.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Jan 24 2007, 03:39 PM, said:

If 4♥ would unquestionably be taken by pard as "heart control, slam try in spades", I would bid that. Otherwise just a plain 4♠.

The standard expert agreement is that 4♥ agrees ♠s, and shows a slam try hand, but says nothing at all about a control, let alone the Ace.

[mike777]

thanks for your indepth thinking Mike.

I thought this hand was very close and not a no brainer...and still find it tough.

My partner thought I should bid 5s as 4h is ace asking for us in this situation and 4nt would be quant.

[luckyloser]

mikeh, on Jan 24 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

It would be useful to know if we have an agreement as to the upper limit of 2N: for me it is 22-24. I say this because we have some slam interest opposite a great 24 and more opposite 25-26 counts.

However, if he has real extras, then he can take another call: at least he may be able to.

So the question to me is whether to bid 4♠ or 3N. And this is a no-brainer at any form of scoring: I bid 3N.

There are many, many layouts where a bad trump break defeats 4♠ with 3N on ice.... with fewer where the opps can run 8 tricks before we run 9. So at imps, 3N rates to be the safer contract (btw, I would stayman because I would play in ♥s if he showed them).

At mps, we have not only the consideration that 3N is safer, we also have the consideration that we will often take the same number of tricks in notrump as in ♠s... all the signs are there: two balanced hands with extra high card. My rule of thumb for choosing 3N over a 4-4 major fit is: 1) my support is weak (xxxx qualifies), 2) I have no xx holding and 3) our combined assets are a minimum of 28 hcp.... thus we rate to take our tricks via high winners rather than low ruffs.

nothing to add! very good analysis!

[Gpm_bg]

Nothing so special in this hand to think more then to bid 4♠ after 2nt.
I also assume that 2nt can't be more then 24pts.
we can arrange prrety good cards in 2♣ opener and in the opponents hands for slam in spade. Like these :

Scoring: IMP

---

3nt and 4♥ are easy on open cards, but do you will play it ?

Same like this slam try. Imo 4♠ is normal bid in this sequence

[mike777]

????

[the hog]

mikeh, on Jan 25 2007, 06:55 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 24 2007, 03:39 PM, said:

If 4♥ would unquestionably be taken by pard as "heart control, slam try in spades", I would bid that. Otherwise just a plain 4♠.

The standard expert agreement is that 4♥ agrees ♠s, and shows a slam try hand, but says nothing at all about a control, let alone the Ace.

I disagree with this. Standard expert thinking here is that 4H agrees S, is at least a mild slam try, and shows 1st or 2nd round H control.

[whereagles]

I think you can play both ways:

1.
2NT 3♣
3♠ ..?

4m = nat 4♥ 5m, slammish
4♥ = since 4♠5♥ is bid via transfer, this can be a spade slam try, in which case we cannot impose the 1st/2nd round control requirement.

Of course, you can also play:

2.
2NT 3♣
3♠ ..?

4m = either nat 4♥ 5m slammish OR spade slam try + control in m
4♥ = spade slam try +control in ♥

Variant 1 seems more flexible and less muddy than 2, which requires some afterwards discussion on how to show which hand responder has after 4m.

[pclayton]

The_Hog, on Jan 25 2007, 01:07 AM, said:

mikeh, on Jan 25 2007, 06:55 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 24 2007, 03:39 PM, said:

If 4♥ would unquestionably be taken by pard as "heart control, slam try in spades", I would bid that. Otherwise just a plain 4♠.

The standard expert agreement is that 4♥ agrees ♠s, and shows a slam try hand, but says nothing at all about a control, let alone the Ace.

I disagree with this. Standard expert thinking here is that 4H agrees S, is at least a mild slam try, and shows 1st or 2nd round H control.

Nope i agree with Mike. Since 4C and 4D is natural, 4H is the only slam try avilable (since its impossible) and it doesnt promise a control. 4N is quant and 5C is KC.

Youd be stuck with 4H holding something like KQxx xxx Axxx xx for instance.

[cherdano]

The_Hog, on Jan 25 2007, 11:07 AM, said:

mikeh, on Jan 25 2007, 06:55 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 24 2007, 03:39 PM, said:

If 4♥ would unquestionably be taken by pard as "heart control, slam try in spades", I would bid that. Otherwise just a plain 4♠.

The standard expert agreement is that 4♥ agrees ♠s, and shows a slam try hand, but says nothing at all about a control, let alone the Ace.

I disagree with this. Standard expert thinking here is that 4H agrees S, is at least a mild slam try, and shows 1st or 2nd round H control.

So what do Australians do with a slam try without heart control? If 4m, what do they do with a hand with 4 hearts and a longer minor?

[the hog]

I did say "here" Phil. You will find that most expert pairs here use 4C as a generic slam try, with 4D/H agreeing S and promising 1st or 2nd rd control.

[cherdano]

The_Hog, on Jan 26 2007, 09:26 AM, said:

I did say "here" Phil. You will find that most expert pairs here use 4C as a generic slam try, with 4D/H agreeing S and promising 1st or 2nd rd control.

So how do you bid a hand with 5 clubs, 4 spades and a slam try over there?