[jillybean]

---

2nt is balanced 18-19

Your options now are
3♣ forces 3♦ - weak take out.
3♦ forward going
4C Gerber 1430
4nt Quantitative

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2022-November-15, 23:40, said:

---

2nt is balanced 18-19

Your options now are
3♣ forces 3♦ - weak take out.
3♦ forward going
4C Gerber 1430
4nt Quantitative

It’s rare for me to advise asking for aces early in an auction but, every now and then, it’s clearly the right call.

Gerber has a place in most methods. Here, I can use 4C. While I have suits where I have no control, it’s arithmetically impossible to be off two aces or an A/K combination. Moreover, partner will be declarer so even in the unlikely event that partner has, say Kxx(x) in hearts, and the AQ are offside, they can’t lead hearts through him.

Meanwhile, imagine partner has two aces and three kings…only 17 hcp….we have thirteen top winners, assuming diamonds come home.

Given that diamonds are very likely running (68.5% for a 3-2 break, and there’s no reason to assume that he doesn’t have xxx or the Jack…and even if he has xx and the suit is 4-1, 20% of the time the Jack is stiff.

So if we have all the aces and kings, we’re bidding 7N.

If we’re missing an ace, 6N.

If we’re missing a king….now things get interesting. I can’t find out which king is missing, nor can I find out his shape. If I were bidding grand, off a king, it would be in diamonds since I have more technique available to me in a suit contract. However, personally I opt for 6N. Imagine Axx AKx Jx AKxxx….a great 19 and 7D is very much against the odds.

[mw64ahw]

Using the Wolff Sign-off type structure.

Initially 3♣-3♦-3NT as a slam try in ♦ allowing opener to cue ♣ to show the King.

Following sequences can then establish further controls and convert to a NT slam if available.

I avoid 4NT as this risks being passed when you have a source of tricks.

Gerber is possible, but which flavour do you play?; Min/Max, Kings, other.

Other bids
3♣-3♦-3M shortage
3♣-3♦-4♣ SI
3♦ looking for 3NT no shortage
3M slam try in Major playing Walsh

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2022-November-16, 00:39, said:

If we’re missing a king….now things get interesting. I can’t find out which king is missing, nor can I find out his shape. If I were bidding grand, off a king, it would be in diamonds since I have more technique available to me in a suit contract. However, personally I opt for 6N. Imagine Axx AKx Jx AKxxx….a great 19 and 7D is very much against the odds.

Well it is but only because I already hold the ♣A so that hand is rather unlikely

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-November-16, 02:04, said:

Well it is but only because I already hold the ♣A so that hand is rather unlikely

Lol. Covid is my excuse😀

[mikeh]

mw64ahw, on 2022-November-16, 02:01, said:

Using th Wolff Sign-off type structure.

Initially 3♣-3♦-3NT as a slam try in ♦ allowing opener to cue ♣ to show the King.

Following sequences can then establish further controls and convert to a NT slam if available.

I avoid 4NT as this risks being passed when you have a source of tricks.

Gerber is possible, but which flavour flavour you play?; Min/Max, Kings, other.

Other bids
3♣-3♦-3M shortage
3♣-3♦-4♣ SI
3♦ looking for 3NT no shortage
3M SI playing Walsh
3M slam try in Major playing Walsh

Slam try?

Really?

And I thought I was a conservative bidder, lol.

[thepossum]

I'm either bidding 6NT or Gerber

[ali quarg]

mikeh, on 2022-November-16, 02:19, said:

Slam try?

Really?

And I thought I was a conservative bidder, lol.

Always a slam try from North's perspective until you actually get there

[nullve]

jillybean, on 2022-November-15, 23:40, said:

---

2nt is balanced 18-19

Your options now are
3♣ forces 3♦ - weak take out.
3♦ forward going
4C Gerber 1430
4nt Quantitative

Is 4♦, either directly over 2N or after 2N-3♣; 3♦, really not available to set diamonds as trumps?

The auction could go

1♣-1♦
2N-(3♣
3♦)-4♦
4M*-4N**

* cue
** RKC(♦)

or

1♣-1♦
2N-(3♣
3♦)-4♦
4N*-5♣/♦**
5♥***-5N****

* RKC(♦)
** whichever shows 0 or 3
*** trump Q ask
**** trump Q, no black king, grand slam interest

.

[Cyberyeti]

Do you have agreements what bidding 3♣ then doing something unexpected over 3♦ means ? seems you can put some of the big hands through this to differentiate them.

[LBengtsson]

The whole part of jillybean's post is not all about points imo, but shape. On this auction what shape hands could partner have for 2NT after 1♦? Not many, I guess. Would 4414 be in the mix, or do you have a Multi or Roman opening 2 ♦ bid that accommodates this shape? Or do you lie with this shape and open 1♣ and then reverse, or are you disciplined?

Partner cannot be 34(M)15 as that would be covered by a reverse imo. So that leaves 4(M)324 if using 5M opening bids, or 4333, 3325 or could partner be 3316m/3226m here also? (Also possible is 4432 if you open 1♣ as 2+ and do not open 1♦ here).

I think the methods used need clarifying before actually answering the question, that's why I think using any control-asking bid like Gerber immediately is promblematic, but some other bidding sequence such as nullve used might be the way forward.

It makes a big difference if partner turns up with a stiff in my ♦ suit as opposed to a doubleton or tripleton, and it also makes a difference if partner could turn up with ♣KQJxxx or similar as the chances of making 7NT increase enormously if we hold all the aces.

[DavidKok]

The 2NT jump rebid is a weakness of standard bidding, and there are many possible followups. Personally I believe transfers are best (better than the Wolff signoff at least, which itself is better than checkback, which is better than 'just wing it, partner!'). Incidentally Dutch Doubleton has a different auction, alleviating my problems.
But let me instead focus on hand evaluation. Mikeh pointed out we are always going to 6NT and with all aces 7NT is a percentage action, and I agree. Personally I am greedy for a bit more - trying to find out when partner's hand is suitable for 7♦, or finding 7NT with a missing king, or staying in 6NT opposite all aces but an unsuitable hand. I think Gerber into king ask is the first plan that should come to mind, what could go wrong? If we miss one ace we sign off in 6NT, if we have all aces and all kings we jump to 7NT, so really we are just worried about all aces and a missing king. What if partner is missing two kings? Something like ♠AJx, ♥AKQ, ♦Jxx, ♣QJxx, now I would not want to be in 7.
With the way I ask for key cards I can ask for aces, then for specific kings and then for something extra. This will get us to a correct 7 most of the time when it is right - asking for extras communicates that all aces are in and we have 12 tricks, and partner will upgrade KQ-combinations (specifically, we are looking for one in clubs or hearts). I think that solves most of the problems. The alternative option is to confirm diamonds first, then ask for aces and kings later. I think this second option is worse - we are looking for some trick-taking potential in the form of suitable queens, while partner will be evaluating their hand based on diamond length and presence of aces and kings. Those don't match.

[ali quarg]

DavidKok, on 2022-November-16, 04:39, said:

Personally I believe transfers are best (better than the Wolff signoff at least, which itself is better than checkback, which is better than 'just wing it, partner!').

Can you expand on a transfer-based mechanism and what additional options is gives you compared to the Wolff sign-off?

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2022-November-16, 04:39, said:

The 2NT jump rebid is a weakness of standard bidding, and there are many possible followups. Personally I believe transfers are best (better than the Wolff signoff at least, which itself is better than checkback, which is better than 'just wing it, partner!'). Incidentally Dutch Doubleton has a different auction, alleviating my problems.
But let me instead focus on hand evaluation. Mikeh pointed out we are always going to 6NT and with all aces 7NT is a percentage action, and I agree. Personally I am greedy for a bit more - trying to find out when partner's hand is suitable for 7♦, or finding 7NT with a missing king, or staying in 6NT opposite all aces but an unsuitable hand. I think Gerber into king ask is the first plan that should come to mind, what could go wrong? If we miss one ace we sign off in 6NT, if we have all aces and all kings we jump to 7NT, so really we are just worried about all aces and a missing king. What if partner is missing two kings? Something like ♠AJx, ♥AKQ, ♦Jxx, ♣QJxx, now I would not want to be in 7.
With the way I ask for key cards I can ask for aces, then for specific kings and then for something extra. This will get us to a correct 7 most of the time when it is right - asking for extras communicates that all aces are in and we have 12 tricks, and partner will upgrade KQ-combinations (specifically, we are looking for one in clubs or hearts). I think that solves most of the problems. The alternative option is to confirm diamonds first, then ask for aces and kings later. I think this second option is worse - we are looking for some trick-taking potential in the form of suitable queens, while partner will be evaluating their hand based on diamond length and presence of aces and kings. Those don't match.

We also disliked the followups to the 2N rebid so removed the 2N rebid from our balanced hand structure.

We would bid this hand 1♣-1♦-1N (15-bad 19)-2♣(artificial)- and then with the 17-19 hands

2N 3334
3♣ 5+♣
3♦ (42)34
3M (43)24

and go from there.

[DavidKok]

Pete Matthew's article (website, look for "Opener Rebids 2NT (A)") discusses the advantages and disadvantages of several treatments when partner rebids 2NT. I found this article very clear and helpful. Note that there is a list of references at the end of the article, if you want more details on any of the treatments.
The downside of transfers (strong 4=4 majors) can in part be alleviated (in fact, it is not clear to me what the sequence 1m-1♥; 2NT-3♥* shows if not strong 4=4 majors - with 4=5 majors you can rebid 3♦* into 3♠) by responses on the first round - in particular, this happens to not be an issue for Dutch Doubleton.

[jillybean]

nullve, on 2022-November-16, 03:08, said:

Is 4♦, either directly over 2N or after 2N-3♣; 3♦, really not available to set diamonds as trumps?

It is really not available and if you used that it would cause confusion and risk being passed.

Cyberyeti, on 2022-November-16, 04:04, said:

Do you have agreements what bidding 3♣ then doing something unexpected over 3♦ means ? seems you can put some of the big hands through this to differentiate them.

No, we have no agreements in this auction other than stated in the OP

LBengtsson, on 2022-November-16, 04:33, said:

The whole part of jillybean's post is not all about points imo, but shape. On this auction what shape hands could partner have for 2NT after 1♦? Not many, I guess. Would 4414 be in the mix, or do you have a Multi or Roman opening 2 ♦ bid that accommodates this shape? Or do you lie with this shape and open 1♣ and then reverse, or are you disciplined?

Partner cannot be 34(M)15 as that would be covered by a reverse imo. So that leaves 4(M)324 if using 5M opening bids, or 4333, 3325 or could partner be 3316m/3226m here also? (Also possible is 4432 if you open 1♣ as 2+ and do not open 1♦ here).

I think the methods used need clarifying before actually answering the question, that's why I think using any control-asking bid like Gerber immediately is promblematic, but some other bidding sequence such as nullve used might be the way forward.

It makes a big difference if partner turns up with a stiff in my ♦ suit as opposed to a doubleton or tripleton, and it also makes a difference if partner could turn up with ♣KQJxxx or similar as the chances of making 7NT increase enormously if we hold all the aces.

Partner could be 4414,we don't have Multi (it's forbidden) or Roman He would have reversed with 5+ clubs and 4+M

[jillybean]

---

I'll let you fill in the blanks, I'm not proud of my auction but I played in 6♦ on J♣ lead. An invitation to join Forums should be sent to the 13 other BBO'ers who fell into the 3nt trap.

If I was bidding this with my partner, I would have gone Gerber route, hopefully to 6nt.

[LBengtsson]

jillybean, on 2022-November-16, 08:13, said:

---

I'll let you fill in the blanks, I'm not proud of my auction but I played in 6♦ on J♣ lead. An invitation to join Forums should be sent to the 13 other BBO'ers who fell into the 3nt trap.

If I was bidding this with my partner, I would have gone Gerber route, hopefully to 6nt.

A ace has migrated north, unlike the birds, jillybean lol

[jillybean]

OH MY LORD, I can only blame late nights & early mornings, no covid.
Perhaps we can just delete this thread , or rename it

Or call it

---

How horribly embarrassing, but you know Bengsston, some birds in the Southern Hemisphere do migrate North.

[ali quarg]

jillybean, on 2022-November-16, 08:34, said:

OH MY LORD, I can only blame late nights & early mornings, no covid.
Perhaps we can just delete this thread , or rename it

Or call it

---

West has dropped a card