[ArtK78]

I don't know if there is anything to be learned from this hand. But it did reveal a stark contrast in approach to bidding an unusual hand by two experienced players.

Swiss Teams, 7 board match. IMPs converted to VPs (20 VP scale). No one vul.

---

At the other table, the South player tried to describe his hand. He bid 3♦, then spades, and eventually just took a shot at 6♦.

At my table, my partner just took a shot - 7♦!

My partner was the winner, as I held:

Kxx
AKxxxxx
----
Kxx

The opening lead was the ♣A (not that he needed the ♣K as a trick). My partner laid down the ♦A and the ♦J fell singleton from the preempter's hand. Claim.

So what would you do?

[By the way, this was a very important result, as my team won the event by 1 VP, and the other team on this hand finished 2nd]

[whereagles]

Not 7 for sure, a few too many holes.. so just 6. This sort of hand cannot be bid scientifically anyway.

[billw55]

ArtK78, on 2014-September-22, 09:45, said:

At the other table, the South player tried to describe his hand.

heheh good luck.

7♦ is a pretty wild guess, I think I would only try that if I feel strongly that we need a swing. Even finding the ♠K with partner may not be enough. I think I would bid 6♦ directly - chances of communicating my actual hand to partner starting at the 3 level are remote, and might only help ops by allowing a club raise.

Another question, what would I do if ops bid 7♣ over that? Egads.

[Cyberyeti]

I bid 3♦, if partner bids 3♥ I bid 3♠, if partner bids 4♠ I bid 5N GSF, when he shows the K I bid 7♦.

[helene_t]

7d is ok. After a lightner double I expect a heart lead.

[mikeh]

I don't know why anyone would just blast. It is almost impossible to construct a hand on which concealment is the key to success, and relatively easy to find hands on which science makes the bidding relatively easy, plus if all else fails, we can end up blasting anyway.

So 3♦ for now.

This is a freak hand (duh) so it isn't even inconceivable that partner will bid 3♠! Imagine how easy the auction is then.

However he'll probably bid either of 3♥ or 3N.

If 3N, then we have a problem in that we have identified club wastage and we now have a lot of spades to get rid off, plus while one can argue that 4♠ is forcing (I think it is, fwiw, with 5=6 and not enough to bid this way forcing, bid spades first, since 4♦ over 3N is forcing for sure), partner with Kxx KQxxx xx KQx may think otherwise.

Over 3♥ it is trivial to bid 3♠...again, what is the worst that can happen?

My approach would be no surprise to any of my partners or frequent opps....or readers here. Whenever possible, whenever doing so creates little risk, I always try to involve partner in the auction. Imagine bidding 7♦ and finding a normal dummy of xxx AKJxx xx KQx. Do we like our chances? we'd be lucky, on the usual club lead, to get out for -1, and -2 is far more likely. Not that we are ever stopping short of slam, but this shows why blasting is just giving up on bidding intelligently.

[mikeh]

helene_t, on 2014-September-22, 10:16, said:

7d is ok. After a lightner double I expect a heart lead.

So would rho, since that is what double means. Thus why would East, with a spade void, double?

[benlessard]

I think 7D is a mistake, your not even sure to have an entry into opener hand. Im not saying that its going to be easy after 3D but at least you will be in a better position.

Maybe its logical that a direct 6C implies that you dont have 2H.

ex
3D-3NT
4D-4NT (neg)
6C
since youve allowed partner to cuebid 4H you should have 2H+solid D.

vs

3D-3NT
6C

Here partner should understand that Ah,Ks are the winning cards.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on 2014-September-22, 14:22, said:

I don't know why anyone would just blast.

Well, I can give you two reasons for blasting. One is that opps will have less info to find a (good) sac. The other is I don't see how to discover if pard has the ♠K.

Maybe you're right and 3♦ is better. Just that every time I get a hand like this (I've had a few, not many obviously doh!) blasting seems to work better.

[Cascade]

7♦ is the value bid.

The question is can we do better with a probing auction - staying out of 7♦ when it is hopeless and getting to 7♠ when it is better?

I think we can so I start with 3♦ but I am bidding at least 7♦ unless I hear some bad news on the way.

[the hog]

3D. 7D is for nutters. I will also try to describe my hand. Is this the same pd that bid 6 against Justin?

[Fluffy]

Describing this hand is nuts, blasting is also pretty hopeless what you gotta do is explore what partner has before comminting, Cyberyeti has shown an easy example with GSF.

If we 7 spades and 5 diamonds it might be better to start with 3♦ to explore diamond fit right away, but with the good suit being the lowest partner might rectify to 7♠ which would suck.

[ArtK78]

the hog, on 2014-September-23, 05:05, said:

3D. 7D is for nutters. I will also try to describe my hand. Is this the same pd that bid 6 against Justin?

Obviously not. Far too many diamonds.

[By the way, I have played with that person as a partner (about 25 years ago) and, more recently, as a teammate (still about 10 years ago). I will not make that mistake again.]

[mikeh]

whereagles, on 2014-September-23, 02:14, said:

Well, I can give you two reasons for blasting. One is that opps will have less info to find a (good) sac. The other is I don't see how to discover if pard has the ♠K.

Maybe you're right and 3♦ is better. Just that every time I get a hand like this (I've had a few, not many obviously doh!) blasting seems to work better.

Your level of expertise is showing through

Partner opened 1♥. We hold spades and diamonds. If we can make 7♦, and the odds are that we can, then precisely which 7-level sac worries you?


As for finding out the spade K.....lol......you have no idea how partner might be able to show that card (or imply it) if we bid diamonds and spades...no idea at all? I'm not claiming that I or my partners would always be able to tell about that card, but I am certain that there are auctions that begin with 3♦ where we might, and no auctions that begin, from the OP point, with 7♦ (or 6♦) where we can.

However, I won't argue that for you blasting is better than cooperative bidding....that sounds right to me

[whereagles]

Well, forget it.

[WellSpyder]

whereagles, on 2014-September-23, 10:42, said:

Well, forget it.

Shouldn't this sort of comment be accompanied by an invitation to other forum members to take legal action?

Actually, I can think of another possible reason for blasting besides those you gave - it sidesteps the inevitable argument with partner about whose judgment was at fault when you try to explore the hand and still end up in the wrong spot...

[bruceboje]

It's nice when a shot in the dark bid works. It's very unlikely that 7D will make if partner doesn't have the spade king. Even if partner has king, there are quite a few hands that won't make 7D. The 7D bid is betting on partner holding the spade king. What are the odds?

I'm not too worried about saves after partner opens 1 heart.

I bid 6 diamonds.

[gszes]

Trying to put this in perspective after listening to the bidding and assuming
your system was so good your partner could describe their hand to perfection so
the dummy was no surprise would you still wish to be in 7d? Listening to the
bidding it would not shock me one bit if both pointed suits broke badly.

There is no reason to completely give up on a spade contract and even if I were in
the mood to bid 7d I would still give p the chance to bid 3s over my

3d

bid. I would not start with spades but only play spades if a nine card fit existed.
I am quite surprised the other pair managed to play in diamonds despite knowing about
the 8+ card spade fit I am pretty certain I would have at least converted 6d to 6s
(leading to 7s perhaps?) but cannot comment further w/o hearing the bidding. I think 7d
was an educated guess but one that should not have been made when so many avenues of
exploration were possible and 7d can always be bid later if the search for more information
appears fruitless. I would rate a 7d bid as 6 or 7 (hardly horrific and there may have been
SOTM considerations not mentioned making it a somewhat better--or worse bid) with 3d closer
to 10.