[kgr]

IMP's

---

What contract is probably best?


Bidding continued:
2NT-3C (3C=Puppet Stayman)
3S-3NT (3S=5cS)
Do you agree with the bidding?

Other options were:
- 2NT-4C: Slam interest with C
- 2NT-5C: to play
- 2NT-3C-3D/3NT-4C: Slam interest C, partner bid 4NT if no good hand for C. (This is why I started with 3C. But over 3S, 4C is control with S-fit)
- 2NT-3NT: to play
- 2NT-3C-3S-5C: to play

[ahydra]

A perfect minimum is AKx Axxx AKQ xxx - but if partner has soft values and/or two small clubs instead then 6C probably won't make (eg AQJx AKJx KQx xx). Perhaps I'd try 4C over 2NT, assuming partner has a sensible way of rejecting the slam try (eg 5C).

If you didn't fancy slam, playing MPs there's something to be said for just bidding 3NT and being done with it. At imps you would do the same but with 5C instead. [On the flip side of the coin, you might turn a blind eye to science and punt 6C ]

ahydra

[ArtK78]

ahydra, on 2012-May-09, 10:38, said:

A perfect minimum is AKx Axxx AKQ xxx - but if partner has soft values and/or two small clubs instead then 6C probably won't make (eg AQJx AKJx KQx xx). Perhaps I'd try 4C over 2NT, assuming partner has a sensible way of rejecting the slam try (eg 5C).

If you didn't fancy slam, playing MPs there's something to be said for just bidding 3NT and being done with it. At imps you would do the same but with 5C instead. [On the flip side of the coin, you might turn a blind eye to science and punt 6C ]

ahydra

You can put the AK A AKQ in any order, mix them up between the non-club suits and achieve the same result.

Or you can have partner have AK AKQ in the rounded suits (either way) and the ♣A with nothing in hearts and achieve the same result.

A reasonable method on this hand is using any system that can show clubs by transfer. I play 4-suit transfers over 2NT openings, so 3♠ would show clubs. I can follow up with 4♥ showing shortness and partner can place the contract. The only drawback is that sometimes the contract is 4NT.

[the_clown]

I would just bid 5♣

[TWO4BRIDGE]

I think the safest is for Opener to play in 5C .
So, use whatever system you have to get Opener to bid Clubs first.

If in 3NT, there is a good possibility that Opener may be locked out of dummy's ♣ .

[Codo]

kgr, on 2012-May-09, 10:22, said:

IMP's

---

What contract is probably best?


Bidding continued:
2NT-3C (3C=Puppet Stayman)
3S-3NT (3S=5cS)
Do you agree with the bidding?

Other options were:
- 2NT-4C: Slam interest with C
- 2NT-5C: to play
- 2NT-3C-3D/3NT-4C: Slam interest C, partner bid 4NT if no good hand for C. (This is why I started with 3C. But over 3S, 4C is control with S-fit)
- 2NT-3NT: to play
- 2NT-3C-3S-5C: to play

You need to forsee the possibility that partner has a 5 card major, so 2 NT 3 ♣ is a bad bet.
I would swith the method, so that 4 ♣ is a slam try in clubs and 4 ♦ is the -sorry no interesst- answer. To use 4 Nt for this is a waste of space.

I would look for 6 ♣ if I can ask partner how he rates his hand for slam.

[mikl_plkcc]

With 26 HCPs and not-so-great shape (opener is shapeless), slam is unlikely. So in my system, I would bid 5♣ directly to stop the auction (in my system there is no transfer mechanism to minors over 2NT).

[Cyberyeti]

I think you need 2 guaranteed ways to bid 5♣ showing different ranges.

2N-5♣ - don't even think about bidding on

2N-...... 5♣ showing this type of hand where aces and kings are important and partner can bid on if he likes his hand.

This allows 2N-4♣ to be kept for stronger invites than this one.

Suggestion 2N-3♣-3♠-4♣ is 2-way, the 2N opener cues a red suit and if you bid 5♣ it shows this type of hand, any other bid, spades are agreed.

What do you use 2N-3♠ for btw, that's where this hand fits for me via 2N-3♠(various minor suited hands)-3N-4♣.

[Zelandakh]

I think the simplest solution is to play a 3♠ response as slam interest with either 6+ clubs or both minors 5 or longer. Partner can bid 3NT with 2 clubs, 4♣ with 3+ clubs but a hand that would decline a slam try and something higher with 3+ clubs and a hand that would accept a slam try. If you were to play my compromise convention over 2NT - 4♣, where 4♦ denies a slam try and 4♥ thru 5♣ accept the slam try and show key cards, then you could try that. As Yeti points out, you might also define something like: 2NT - 3♠; 3NT - 5♣ to be a mild slam try in clubs, whatever else you happen to use this 3♠ bid to be.

[32519]

kgr, on 2012-May-09, 10:22, said:

IMP's

---

What contract is probably best?

I would love to see the full hand. Can you post it?

[Cyberyeti]

Codo, on 2012-May-09, 15:15, said:

You need to forsee the possibility that partner has a 5 card major, so 2 NT 3 ♣ is a bad bet.
I would swith the method, so that 4 ♣ is a slam try in clubs and 4 ♦ is the -sorry no interesst- answer. To use 4 Nt for this is a waste of space.

I would look for 6 ♣ if I can ask partner how he rates his hand for slam.

Except that if 4N is the no interest answer, 4♦ may be asking for aces.

[kgr]

IMP's

---

Result : 3NT-3
From the answers here it is clear that my bidding was less than perfect. Maybe I play too much MP's

[Cyberyeti]

kgr, on 2012-May-10, 08:44, said:

From the answers here it is clear that my bidding was less than perfect. Maybe I play too much MP's

No, if you played too much MP bridge you'd have bid 2N-3N, E leads a spade and you chalk up 430:)

[kgr]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-May-10, 08:47, said:

No, if you played too much MP bridge you'd have bid 2N-3N, E leads a spade and you chalk up 430:)

Yes, but I still realized for some time that it was IMP's

[aguahombre]

If South decides to dismiss slam at the outset...a reasonable judgement...then, this hand becomes a good advertisement for the alertable 3NT response ---removable if opener cannot stop both majors.

People who do this have another way of getting partner to play in 3NT if their hand does not have that conern. Ours is mandatory puppet, even without interest in a true major suit fit; others might use 3S as a demand transfer to 3NT (which responder passes, or removes with other strength/patterns.

2N-3N*
4C-5C (4C=doesn't have both majors under control.)