[Kalvan14]

Scoring: MP

1C - (P) - 1H - (P) - 1N - (P) - 2D* - 3H** - (P) - 4C - (P) - 4D - (P) - ?

* NMF
** 13-14, 3-cards fit

---

4♥? Anything else?
You're playing 2/1, with mixed Qs

[joshs]

Over 1N, I would have just bid 4N quantitative with that hand. Now I am:
a. just guessing
b. helping the defense out with what to lead

My estimate was that we had a 60% slam before the cuebidding started, and now we are down to 50% having pinpointed a spade lead.

ps. 6N is probably almost as good as 6H because of the minor honors in the pointed suits. 6H only gains if you need to ruff out the clubs (which is possible). On the other hand, we probably want the lead coming up to partner's hand. So I would still vote for 6N as the best contract, but the cue bids really hurt you.

[mike777]

I would have just bid 3nt over 1nt.

second choice 4nt if feeling frisky.

[mikeh]

Your choices are 5♥, focusing on a ♠ control or 4♥, which is probably ending the auction, but which may persuade an intelligent partner to try 4♠ with, say, Ax xxx AKxxx Kxx: a control rich max should bid with ♠ control.

This hand has too many Jacks to be worth its full weight, plus on most hands the ♥ Jack is wasted. And the ♠ situation could be very bad: Qxx opposite Jxx, 2 top losers and a possible ruff: on an auction in which a blind, deaf opponent will find the lead: indeed, if on lead with Axxxx, it is an easy underlead!

So stay disciplined: 4♥

[kenrexford]

If 3S would have been a cuebid by you (I assume this), then your 4C cue denied a spade control. Partner's 4D cue, therefore, promises a spade control. As last train, however, the diamond control inference is weaker than the spade control inference. Thus, if anything, I disagree that this sequence has pinpointed a spade lead -- if anything a diamond lead may be suggested.

Further, if 3NT by you would have been Serious 3NT, you already expressed doubt, with an 18-count, by bypassing 3NT. How many more times can you express doubt? Partner does not make a courtesy cuebid when you express doubt. His cuebid (made by a hand with no contribution in trumps, mind you) was a very strong contextual action. I'd expect, at a minimum, AKx-xxx-xx-KQJxx. More likely, however, that partner has solid clubs, with at least one side first-round control and one side second-round control (Axx-xxx-Kx-KQJxx or Kxx-xxx-Ax-KQJxx). Double firsts is also possible.

Worst case, then, I expect a spade lead into Kx(x). On any other lead, I pull trumps, ditch the "wrong" suit on clubs, and then set up trick twelve in the "right" suit. This seems fairly good odds.

I could resort, now, to 1430 RKCB, on the hope that partner actually holds Axx-xxx-AKx-Kxxxx, and clubs split 3-3, but that is asking much. Instead, I resort to 1430 with the remote concern that partner holds a mere KQx-xxx-Kx-KQJxx and overbid his hand.

[Kalvan14]

I choose 5♥, pinpointing a likely problem in diamonds or spades (4♦ can be last train, confirming a spade stopper and denying a diamond stopper).
We do not play 3N (either serious or non-serious), in particular on a sequence like this which is a bit mixed (from pard POV, the strain might be clubs).
5♥ has the added advantage of removing this doubt.

Pard had a good minimum for his bid Axx xxx Ax KQTxx, and raised to 6.
Spade lead, but clubs were 3-3, and the ♦K was on-side. 13 tricks.

[pclayton]

4♦ as Last Train by pard would be more effective since it would promise a spade control.

I don't like a quantitative 4N since it doesn't really tell pard what he needs to know. Someone has to assume captaincy here and it should be us.

This is a good hand and it looks even better opposite a max 1N rebid. I'll try 5♥. I'm not sure I'll place the contract in 6N, there are many hands where we need to ruff out the clubs for spade pitches to make 6. ♥ would seem to be the contract to make the more likely overtrick too. I may change my mind depending on what pard does over 5♥.

Looking at QJ♦, theres a good chance they find the spade lead anyway, so we might as well hone in on the spade problem and not guess. If pard holds: xxx, xxx, AKT, KQJT, oh well.

[Cascade]

mikeh, on Mar 15 2006, 01:08 PM, said:

Your choices are 5♥, focusing on a ♠ control or 4♥, which is probably ending the auction, but which may persuade an intelligent partner to try 4♠ with, say, Ax xxx AKxxx Kxx: a control rich max should bid with ♠ control.

An intelligent partner wouldn't open 1♣ with this hand

[mikeh]

Cascade, on Mar 14 2006, 09:46 PM, said:

mikeh, on Mar 15 2006, 01:08 PM, said:

Your choices are 5♥, focusing on a ♠ control or 4♥, which is probably ending the auction, but which may persuade an intelligent partner to try 4♠ with, say, Ax xxx AKxxx Kxx: a control rich max should bid with ♠ control.

An intelligent partner wouldn't open 1♣ with this hand

oops, and I cannot use the 'no coffee' excuse this time: how about the difficulty I have in telling the minors apart

[Cascade]

Best chance for slam looks like great clubs and the ♦K and ♠A something like:

---

Bidding 5♥ might encourage partner to bid slam but he might also go with the ♠K and not the ace and maybe a fifth club with doubleton spade or diamond.

The reality is that we have a poor hand for slam with 18 hcp and only 5 controls even a hand rich in controls from partner ♠AK, ♦K and ♣K will only produce slam if partner has 3-2 or 2-3 in spades and diamonds.

With so many Queens and Jacks we will need something super from partner and it will be hard for him to judge the hands that make and those that don't.

I simple quantitative raise over 1NT might work. I usually play that with a marginal hand over 4NT opener would show his controls which allows us to stop out of slam when we have three or more controls missing.

[kenrexford]

The partnership agreements here are getting confusing. If a 2D start is the only way to GF with club slam interest, then should not 4C complete that message? I understand the problem and the 5H cure, but this auction seems troubling if that is possible.

This might be a time to consider some variety of two-way checkback. The one I use most often involves a 2C call here to ask for partner's valuation opposite hearts. Partner will bid 2S (3, with maximum), establishing the fit and a game-force. Now, you have a lot more room to explore niceties.

[Kalvan14]

there would be no problem, unless pard rebids 3♥ (with which bid I fully agree, btw). And even in this case there is a cure: 5♥.

I'm reasonably against building a very complicate structure to cater to a (not frequent) possible problem

[hatchett]

I consider this a below average 17 count. I'm not convinced I would have made a slam try now I think 4♥ is certainly enough.

[Walddk]

hatchett, on Mar 15 2006, 08:04 AM, said:

I consider this a below average 17 count. I'm not convinced I would have made a slam try now I think 4♥ is certainly enough.

I make it an 18 count, but never mind, I agree with you. 4♥ comes next. I already did enough by cue bidding 4♣ (slam interest), denying a spade control. The rest is up to partner.

Roland

[Codo]

I did not get the point. You denied a Spade control. He denied a diamond control, or why was he bidding 4 Diamond? This must had been a spade control with doubt about diamonds. So 4 Heart is clear cut.

[whereagles]

Cuebidding can get messy... lol.

Anyway, I don't like the looks of this. It would take a magic hand in front to make slam a good one, and, opposite an average hand, the 5-level seems in jeapordy. I'd bid 4♥ and leave it to pard to go on if he does have a magic hand.

Admitedly, this leaves the decision to the weaker hand (something you can't do unless pard is a top expert), but it feels right to be conservative on this one.

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on Mar 15 2006, 12:08 AM, said:

Your choices are 5♥, focusing on a ♠ control or 4♥, which is probably ending the auction, but which may persuade an intelligent partner to try 4♠ with, say, Ax xxx AKxxx Kxx: a control rich max should bid with ♠ control.

To focus on ♠ control I would bid 5♣. Nevermind this is a clear 4♥

[Kalvan14]

Fluffy, on Mar 15 2006, 06:12 AM, said:

mikeh, on Mar 15 2006, 12:08 AM, said:

Your choices are 5♥, focusing on a ♠ control or 4♥, which is probably ending the auction, but which may persuade an intelligent partner to try 4♠ with, say, Ax xxx AKxxx Kxx: a control rich max should bid with ♠ control.

To focus on ♠ control I would bid 5♣. Nevermind this is a clear 4♥

You must have missed a point that was in my earlier post: clubs might be the strain where I want to play.
The choice is between a slightly conservative 4♥ [it's MP, so it should not be bad even if the slam is there] and a more aggressive [but technically sound] 5♥.

4N would never be my choice: you make slam also opposed KQxx xxx Ax KQxx.

[Kalvan14]

whereagles, on Mar 15 2006, 04:43 AM, said:

Cuebidding can get messy... lol.

Anyway, I don't like the looks of this. It would take a magic hand in front to make slam a good one, and, opposite an average hand, the 5-level seems in jeapordy. I'd bid 4♥ and leave it to pard to go on if he does have a magic hand.

Admitedly, this leaves the decision to the weaker hand (something you can't do unless pard is a top expert), but it feels right to be conservative on this one.

A magic hand? Pard bid 3♥, without any honor. It is very unlikely that the 5-level is in jeopardy. 4♥ would probably end the bidding.

I might make a case for bidding 6♥: the only risk is finding pard with AKx xxx xx KQJxx or AKQx xxx xx KQxx. [4♦ guarantees a control in spades, but might lack a stopper in diamonds]