BBO Discussion Forums: Slam-worthy? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Slam-worthy?

Poll: Slam-worthy? (18 member(s) have cast votes)

How would you approach the bidding?

  1. Blast 6N (1 votes [5.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.56%

  2. Quant invite 4N (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Puppet Stayman, seeking possible spade slam (2 votes [11.11%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 11.11%

  4. Slam try with long diamonds (result will be playing in 5D/6D/7D, never 3N) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. Minors-oriented slam try showing longer D than C (15 votes [83.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 83.33%

  6. A meek 3N (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2013-September-25, 10:00



Matchpoints.

Partner has shown a balanced 22-23 (2C-2D-2N). Your agreements are that 20-21 or stronger "balanced" hands can be somewhat off-shape.

Your options are described in the above poll.

What do you think is best?

NOTE: Edited to show the 4th club/13th card.
0

#2 User is offline   ArtK78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,786
  • Joined: 2004-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Galloway NJ USA
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
    Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2013-September-25, 10:06

I think it would be best if I had a 13th card.

Show me another card and I will revisit the problem.
0

#3 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2013-September-25, 10:38

View PostArtK78, on 2013-September-25, 10:06, said:

I think it would be best if I had a 13th card.

Show me another card and I will revisit the problem.


Edited now to show the 4th club/13th card.
0

#4 User is offline   neilkaz 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,568
  • Joined: 2006-June-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Barrington IL USA
  • Interests:Backgammon, Bridge, Hockey

Posted 2013-September-25, 13:11

I'm the 9th vote for minor suit slam try with longer ♦ than ♣. If you have that method, it makes sense to use it here.
0

#5 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,404
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2013-September-25, 13:14

View Postneilkaz, on 2013-September-25, 13:11, said:

I'm the 9th vote for minor suit slam try with longer ♦ than ♣. If you have that method, it makes sense to use it here.


My suspicion is that partner has 5 spades and it's now difficult to find 6♠, but not impossible particularly if you have 5N pick a slam available later.
0

#6 User is offline   ggwhiz 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,952
  • Joined: 2008-June-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-September-25, 14:31

Can you not bid puppet stayman followed by 4♦ followed by 6♣? In a pinch 6♠ on the moyse might be better than 6nt and remotely possible to plutz into it.
When a deaf person goes to court is it still called a hearing?
What is baby oil made of?
0

#7 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,697
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2013-September-25, 18:10

the main reason for abandoning spades vs going for the 2 minor suit approach is
because it is still plausible to reach a grand slam in 2 suits looking for minors and
only in 1 suit if u look for spades.
0

#8 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,404
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2013-September-26, 01:26

View Postgszes, on 2013-September-25, 18:10, said:

the main reason for abandoning spades vs going for the 2 minor suit approach is
because it is still plausible to reach a grand slam in 2 suits looking for minors and
only in 1 suit if u look for spades.


Not true, 2N-3♣-3♦-4♦ puts 2 suits in the frame just a different 2 suits, although putting your 5 and 4 card suits rather than 5 and 3 looks better.

What does 2N-3♣-3♦-4M show ? If you use these as 3 cards in a major 54 in the minors maybe you can get all the suits in.
0

#9 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2013-September-28, 05:46

View Postgszes, on 2013-September-25, 18:10, said:

the main reason for abandoning spades vs going for the 2 minor suit approach is
because it is still plausible to reach a grand slam in 2 suits looking for minors and
only in 1 suit if u look for spades.


At matchpoints with a combined 32-33 and a hand that includes lots of soft values, are you really letting the possibility of a grand dictate much of your bidding strategy?
0

#10 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2013-September-28, 06:00

Thanks to folks for responses. Not everyone explained their reasoning, and I was hoping people would discuss how they valued the QJ combos in this hand (better NT holdings) vs. the A and singleton (better suit contract holdings).

I thought my partner made a reasonable blast to 6N, which went down after they found the right lead and a finesse was off. My hand was...

AKx
AJx
KQJT
ATx
0

#11 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,404
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2013-September-28, 08:54

View Postbd71, on 2013-September-28, 06:00, said:

Thanks to folks for responses. Not everyone explained their reasoning, and I was hoping people would discuss how they valued the QJ combos in this hand (better NT holdings) vs. the A and singleton (better suit contract holdings).

I thought my partner made a reasonable blast to 6N, which went down after they found the right lead and a finesse was off. My hand was...

AKx
AJx
KQJT
ATx


If you're going to be in 6N, you might as well be in 7♦. In this case, the no trump hand can see the potential problem as soon as you show both minors, so it works well. I think you should be looking for the suit slam always with the small hand as your suits are not great, and you need 2 stops in hearts unless partner has AK/KQ in the minors, and it's easy to see hands where you just don't have 12 tricks in NT without a finesse but do in a suit, Axx, AJxx, KQJ AKx for example or Axx, AKQx, KQxx, Ax where 6♦ needs one finesse, 6N needs 2.
0

#12 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,855
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2013-October-16, 09:09

What do you use the sequences 2NT - 3♣; 3♦ - 4M for? I play these as showing 54 in the minors. This method would allow you both to check for a 5-3 spade fit and a minor suit fit.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#13 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,617
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2013-October-16, 10:25

View Postggwhiz, on 2013-September-25, 14:31, said:

Can you not bid puppet stayman followed by 4♦ followed by 6♣? In a pinch 6♠ on the moyse might be better than 6nt and remotely possible to plutz into it.


I like this simple approach, and would probably go this route, though it does give up on the possibility of a grand.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users