[Hanoi5]

---

How would you bid these hands? Is slam worth pursuing? What if the opening bid was 5♦?

[JLOGIC]

Either 4D 4S p 5S p 6S, or 4D p p X p 4S AP seem reasonable.

[wyman]

I would expect

(4/5D) P (P) X
(P) 4/5S Pass

to be a popular auction.

[gnasher]

JLOGIC, on 2011-November-20, 17:49, said:

4D 4S p 5S p 6S

Is your West accepting an invitation, or just admitting to a diamond control? With such poor suits, I don't think I'd accept an invitation as West.

I usually think that a five-level raise after a preempt should be played as invitational as well as denying a control in the enemy suit. Maybe this one is different, though?

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2011-November-21, 03:25

[Fluffy]

west has the kind of hand that my father passes a diamond control asking even when he has one. I am more disciplined and pass first.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-November-21, 03:20, said:

Is your West accepting an invitation, or just admitting to a diamond control? With such poor suits, I don't think I'd accept an invitation as West.

I usually think that a five-level raise after a preempt should be played as invitational as well as denying a control in the enemy suit. Maybe this one is different, though?

Obv I meant 5S as demanding a bid of slam with a diamond control. Your treatment seems fine/reasonable. To be honest I was considering breaking discipline with the west hand and passing anyways, which suggests that your suggested treatment is correct lol.

Quote

west has the kind of hand that my father passes a diamond control asking even when he has one.

Nice. It would not surprise me if this was the percentage action. This would be a symptom of the problem that partner has no way to invite slam while showing no diamond control (assuming you play 5S as demanding a slam bid opposite a control). Of course if 5S is a demand for slam opposite a diamond control, you have no way to invite without one, and an invitational hand is likely much more common of a hand type opposite such a wide range, going back to gnasher being right.

If 5C or 5H was a cuebid, that might help this situation. Or perhaps if 5D could be any slam try, and partner would last train with a reasonable hand and a diamond control, that would be a partial solution (partner would also last train or bid slam with a nice hand and no diamond control, this could get you into some trouble, but it would be a rare set of hands where both hands are very strong and have no diamond control, they'd probably need almost everything else, or AKQ opposite a void where there is major duplication or something).

I'm not really into optimizing for every auction though, and my general meta rule would be that 5x is natural, 5D shows a diamond control, and 5S says bid slam with a diamond control, but gnashers meta agreement that 5S is a slam try without a diamond control seems better. How often do you have a slam force opp a diamond control really? Except in this thread!

[JLOGIC]

If I played that way I would just bid keycard over 4S with the east hand and gamble on a diamond control.

[gnasher]

Another option would be to use 4NT as initiating cue-bidding, 5♦ as Keycard, and 5♠ as demanding slam with a diamond control. That doesn't work so well after a 4♥ opening.

Quote

If 5C or 5H was a cuebid, that might help this situation.

I was wondering about that. In sequences where the overcaller has jumped to 4M, I think it's best to play new suits as cue-bids. I'm not sure whether the same would apply in this sequence, though.

The 4♠ bidder has a wide range of hands, and his trump suit can be pretty weak, so I can imagine that there are hands where a 5♣ signoff would work well, with advancer having short spades and lots of clubs. On the other hand, even if I had a 5♣ signoff available, I don't think I'd use it very often, because it would be rare to know that 5♣ would be a better contract.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2011-November-21, 04:21

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2011-November-21, 04:13, said:

In sequences where the overcaller has jumped to 4M, I think it's best to play new suits as cue-bids.

Definitely. I would assume this is standard, partner has shown a strong 1 suiter basically, not like you're going to pull it. I guess 4S over 4H could be a cause of debate, but not 5 level bids.

Quote

On the other hand, even if I had a 5♣ signoff available, I don't think I'd use it very often, because it would be hard to know thta 5♣ would be a better contract.

Meh. You will never know, but presumably there will be hands where it's percentage to bid 5 clubs opposite the wide range of possible spade holdings partner can have. Sucks if he has 7 good ones himself but this is not that likely. Especially if the auction was (4H)-4S, but even over (4m)-4S. I would be bidding with as little as a reasonably good 7 card suit and a stiff spade, I wouldn't have to wait for an 8 bagger or 7 nearly solid or anything.

That said it could be that that is infrequent enough + sometimes it's wrong to be pulling anyways + you would gain a lot by having 5x be a cuebid all combining to make it better to not play it as natural, but I wouldn't guess that that is so.

[Hanoi5]

What if it came:

4♦-Pa-Pa-X
Pa-4♥-Pa-???

Shall East pass? Wouldn't 4♥ be standard with 4-4 in the Majors? But also with the Majors reversed in the actual hand?

[JLOGIC]

Hanoi5, on 2011-November-21, 04:57, said:

What if it came:

4♦-Pa-Pa-X
Pa-4♥-Pa-???

Shall East pass? Wouldn't 4♥ be standard with 4-4 in the Majors? But also with the Majors reversed in the actual hand?

I would correct to 4S.

[Zelandakh]

I have posted about this auction before but it does seems to be another good spot for denial cues, that is to bid 5D without a diamond control and other bids show one. Thus with a slam try and a diamond control we can bid 5S, with serious slam interest and a diamond control we can ask for key cards (or just bid it). Without a diamond control we bid 5D; partner can bid 5S without a diamond control or 5H with a diamond control but not good enough to force to 6 or anything else with a diamond control and a better hand. So for this hand it would give an auction of (4D) - 4S - 5D; 5H - 6S where 5D is slam try or better asking about diamonds and 5H shows a diamond control but would decline a slam try.

I find that this reversal works well in a number of situations; in auctions where we are certain to have a control in their suit (typically grand tries) then the reversed cue shows 1 loser in the suit while bypassing the cue shows 0 losers. The point is that with a control in their suit we are usually better able to take control whereas without a control we will generally need to seek partner's opinion. Gnasher's idea of switching 4NT and 5D may be even better but it is hard to say without having tried it.

[JLOGIC]

Zelandakh, on 2011-November-21, 05:39, said:

So for this hand it would give an auction of (4D) - 4S - 5D; 5H - 6S where 5D is slam try or better asking about diamonds and 5H shows a diamond control but would decline a slam try.

Perfect