[32519]

So how does one bid these hands when a natural weak 2♦ screws up the opening side? This hand was recently dealt at the table. North knows about a 10-card ♦ fit which makes a cross-ruff a nice prospect for those who have ways to explore for the slam despite combined minimal values. Or do you just give up on slam automatically because of the weak 2?

---

Should North not perhaps have tried something else before bidding 5♦?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Possibly slammish from North's perspective only if he has a way of asking for shortness .

[hrothgar]

 32519, on 2012-November-02, 07:02, said:

So how does one bid these hands when a natural weak 2♦ screws up the opening side? This hand was recently dealt at the table. North knows about a 10-card ♦ fit which makes a cross-ruff a nice prospect for those who have ways to explore for the slam despite combined minimal values. Or do you just give up on slam automatically because of the weak 2?

---

Should North not perhaps have tried something else before bidding 5♦?

Move one of Opener's Spades to either Hearts or better yet Clubs.
Where do you want to play now?

North made a simple, practical bid which didn't happen to work. If you want to complain about something, I'd focus on opening 2♦ with a 6-4 pattern and a side 4 card major rather than the response.

[Cyberyeti]

 hrothgar, on 2012-November-02, 07:15, said:

Move one of Opener's Spades to either Hearts or better yet Clubs.
Where do you want to play now?

North made a simple, practical bid which didn't happen to work. If you want to complain about something, I'd focus on opening 2♦ with a 6-4 pattern and a side 4 card major rather than the response.

If you move a spade to clubs, 6 is still making (ruff 2 spades, pitch a club on the 5th heart, give up a club). If you move it to hearts it's only going off on a club lead.

We'd get there but only because we play very unorthodox weak 2s and responses to the enquiry. The initial 2♦ might be a 4 card suit and a zero count hence the need to take drastic action over 2N with this hand.

2♦-2N (big and asking)
4♠(4♠-6♦ max)-4N(KC ♦)
5♥(2 w/o)-6♦

[hrothgar]

 Cyberyeti, on 2012-November-02, 08:00, said:

If you move a spade to clubs, 6 is still making (ruff 2 spades, pitch a club on the 5th heart, give up a club). If you move it to hearts it's only going off on a club lead.

Thanks. I posted too quickly...

[Codo]

But why do you want to bid 2 NT opposite a hand which could be a 4 card diamond suit with zero HCPS?

[kenrexford]

This one is tough because of tactical considerations and because the trump suit is diamonds. That said, the more general question seems to be as to methods.

A few additions into structure might be called for. A couple I use:

1. 3♣ as a response to 2NT shows whatever three of the suit would show, and three of the suit instead shows the weakest holding. For example, playing Ogust with a 2♠ opening, I like 3♠ as "bad hand bad suit" and 3♣ as "good hand good suit," which allows a 3♦ call (2♠-2NT-3♣-3♦) to ask for the feature that makes this "good hand." That combines the benefits of Ogust with the benefits of Feature to sone degree.

2. After the 2NT ask, I like 4♣ as a second ask. (This might also happen after the 3♦ ask.) In many situations, this asks for shortness.

Using that general approach on this hand (if you decided to get sexy rather than make a practical jump):

2♦(weak)-2NT(OGUST ask)
3♣(bad hand good suit)-3♦(tell me more)
3♥(heart shortness -- cannot have a side feature other than shortness if bad suit)-4♣(tell me more)
4♦(no side Queens)-4♥(RKCB diamonds*)
5♣(two without)-6♦

*I would actually likie WKCB here, but the response would be the same -- an Ace and the trump King, no trump Queen

[hrothgar]

 32519, on 2012-November-02, 07:02, said:

So how does one bid these hands when a natural weak 2♦ screws up the opening side? This hand was recently dealt at the table. North knows about a 10-card ♦ fit which makes a cross-ruff a nice prospect for those who have ways to explore for the slam despite combined minimal values. Or do you just give up on slam automatically because of the weak 2?

---

Should North not perhaps have tried something else before bidding 5♦?

FWIW, this is an interesting hand for MOSCITO

The auction would start

1S - 1N
2S - 2N
3C - 3D
3S

The hand is just barely strong enough for a constructive opening.
Opener prefers to show the 6 card Diamond suit rather than the xxxx in Sapdes

After a three relays, the relay captain know that opener has a 4=1=6=2 shape with xxxx in Spades and can comfortably place controls, arriving in 6♦

[Cyberyeti]

 Codo, on 2012-November-02, 08:05, said:

But why do you want to bid 2 NT opposite a hand which could be a 4 card diamond suit with zero HCPS?

We'll play 3♦ unless we want to be higher and I'd rather opps couldn't get their (most often 9+card) spade suit in below the 3 level.

[rmnka447]

I don't see any way to get there no matter what either player does.

After 2 ♦, responder could try to get more information about opener's hand by making a forcing bid. The choices are basically some form of 2 NT (feature ask or Ogust) or a new suit bid if played as forcing.

After, say, 2 ♥ forcing, opener will simply bid 3 ♦ because of no fit with partner. Responder won't have any better idea of what opener holds and is stuck into raising Diamonds at this point.

After 2 NT Ogust, opener will likely show poor hand, good suit or good hand, good suit depending on how the partnership defines good hand vs. bad hand. The problem is that most pairs have no agreement about the follow up auction over the Ogust response. Even if responder could somehow learn that opener had a stiff ♥, there's no way to find out whether there is only 1 ♣ loser.

After 2 NT for a feature, opener simply returns to 3 ♦ if a feature is limited to an A or K. Opener would bid 3 ♥ if shortness is OK to show. In any case, responder faces the same problem as before -- there is just not enough information for responder to be sure that there aren't 2 tricks to be lost.

After a weak 2 bid, slam usually depends on responder being able to see that 12 tricks are at worst probable, if not certain. Responder's hand just isn't good enough to see that here even with the info opener can provide.

If weak 2 bidder passes initially, responder will bid 1 ♥ and the partnership might be taxed to bid game let alone slam.

This is one of those perfect hands where 6 can be made on 21 points but is unbiddable.

[neilkaz]

 TWO4BRIDGE, on 2012-November-02, 07:10, said:

Possibly slammish from North's perspective only if he has a way of asking for shortness .

Some players can ask for a singleton with 3♣. Anyhow, I'd not fret much about missing a 21 HCP slam that gets set if trumps split 3-0.

[32519]

 rmnka447, on 2012-November-02, 11:37, said:

I don't see any way to get there no matter what either player does.

After 2 ♦, responder could try to get more information about opener's hand by making a forcing bid. The choices are basically some form of 2 NT (feature ask or Ogust).

After 2 NT for a feature, opener simply returns to 3 ♦ if a feature is limited to an A or K. Opener would bid 3 ♥ if shortness is OK to show. In any case, responder faces the same problem as before -- there is just not enough information for responder to be sure that there aren't 2 tricks to be lost.

This is one of those perfect hands where 6 can be made on 21 points but is unbiddable.

Don't give up on me yet. Let's see if we can find a solution using "Feature Showing" and allow the ♥ singleton as a feature. North will probably assume that it is the ♥K and attempt a sign-off in 3NT, able to count a possible 10 tricks. When South pulls 3NT to 4♦, North needs to sit back and think, "Hey, what's this idiot partner of mine up to?" Having had some time to think the situation over, North will hopefully come to the conclusion that 3♥ showed a singleton. Now North knows of shortness in both hands and the cross-ruff potential opens the door for at least a slam probe.

Now I pass the ball back to you: What does North use to ask for keycards that would not be ambiguous? 4♥ as kickback? Will South interpret it as kickback? 4NT won't work because South will again read this as an attempted signoff. So in a situation such as this one, do you violate all accepted bidding practices and bid 4♠ as RKCB? It's still not clear how South will interpret the bid.

So after 4♦ if North can find a way to ask for keycards, the slam may still be found. Hopefully someone can help here.

[32519]

 32519, on 2012-November-02, 12:16, said:

When South pulls 3NT to 4♦, North needs to sit back and think, "Hey, what's this idiot partner of mine up to?" Having had some time to think the situation over, North will hopefully come to the conclusion that 3♥ showed a singleton. Now North knows of shortness in both hands and the cross-ruff potential opens the door for at least a slam probe.

What does North use to ask for keycards that would not be ambiguous? 4♥ as kickback? Will South interpret it as kickback? 4NT won't work because South will again read this as an attempted signoff.

So after 4♦ if North can find a way to ask for keycards, the slam may still be found. Hopefully someone can help here.

Having thought about this some more, 4♥ must be interpreted as kickback for ♦. So South now answers 5♣ (2 keycards without the trump queen). North can now close the deal in 6♦ on the cross-ruff potential of the hand.

[ggwhiz]

We combine strength and shape in our responses to 2nt where

3♣ = dreck
3♦ = medium with shortness somewhere
3♥ = medium flat
3♠ = max with shortness
3nt = max flat

The next step over a response with shortness asks for it so

2♦ - 2nt
3♠ - 3nt
4♥ might just get us there but opener has to evaluate the 2♦ bid as a max. Based on seat and colours that would certainly be the case if we were white vs. red and still likely here.

[the_clown]

I think 5♦ +1 is a normal reuslt and I wouldnt worry much about it. If I were you I would rather concentrate on my cardplay and agreements in competitive auctions rather than thinking about some complicated agreement over weak 2 in♦ that benefits you once a year if you are lucky.

[Zelandakh]

 ggwhiz, on 2012-November-03, 11:35, said:

We combine strength and shape in our responses to 2nt where

Have you considered making the ask 2♥ and having a 2NT response show hearts? Then you can get in, say:

2♠ = any medium (2NT asks for a shortage; 3♣ asks for a feature)
2NT = max with shortage (3♣ asks)
3♣ = max, no shortage, club feature
3♦ = dreck
3♥ = max, no shortage, heart feature
3♠ = max, no shortage, spade feature
3NT = max, no shortage, no side feature

Not only is more information available, it is also passed at a lower level. As long as you do not want 2♥ to be non-forcing it seems like a good trade-off.
In this case, you would get the auction starting with
2♦ - 2♥; 2♠ - 2NT; 3♥ for medium and heart shortage, or
2♦ - 2♥; 2NT - 3♣; 3♥ for maximum and heart shortage.

[mikl_plkcc]

 32519, on 2012-November-02, 07:02, said:

So how does one bid these hands when a natural weak 2♦ screws up the opening side? This hand was recently dealt at the table. North knows about a 10-card ♦ fit which makes a cross-ruff a nice prospect for those who have ways to explore for the slam despite combined minimal values. Or do you just give up on slam automatically because of the weak 2?

---

Should North not perhaps have tried something else before bidding 5♦?

Sorry, I can't find any slam perspective at North, even when we are using traditional weak twos. The side suits are just too weak.
I just feel that 5♦ is a further preempt.