[AL78]

MPs, playing Benj Acol weak NT:

---

Do you show the three card spade support or the diamond stop?

[pescetom]

AL78, on 2022-December-16, 12:19, said:

MPs, playing Benj Acol weak NT:

---

Do you show the three card spade support or the diamond stop?

Not my system and I'm not sure what the agreed meaning of 3♦ is (stop ask?) and whether that lengthens the spades or how likely they were to be 4 card in the first place.
But if as I imagine 2♣ was not a game force and 3♠ is non-forcing then 4♠ looks logical and sensible to me in any case.

[LBengtsson]

pescetom, on 2022-December-16, 13:30, said:

Not my system and I'm not sure what the agreed meaning of 3♦ is (stop ask?) and whether that lengthens the spades or how likely they were to be 4 card in the first place.
But if as I imagine 2♣ was not a game force and 3♠ is non-forcing then 4♠ looks logical and sensible to me in any case.

Tough hand to evaluate knowing that ♦Kx is most likely dead, there is a possible ♣ loser, and the ♠ suit (should you choose this suit as trump) could break badly. I am seriously trying to work out the hand shape (and what East actually has?) to bid 3♦ here playing Acol 4M (assumed) also?

And, could 3♦ be a semi-splinter here agreeing ♣ suit? To be honest, I am not sure what the best bid is here, though I agree with pescetom that you have the values for 4♠, it might not be the best place to alight in game.

[AL78]

LBengtsson, on 2022-December-16, 14:13, said:

Tough hand to evaluate knowing that ♦Kx is most likely dead, there is a possible ♣ loser, and the ♠ suit (should you choose this suit as trump) could break badly. I am seriously trying to work out the hand shape (and what East actually has?) to bid 3♦ here playing Acol 4M (assumed) also?

And, could 3♦ be a semi-splinter here agreeing ♣ suit? To be honest, I am not sure what the best bid is here, though I agree with pescetom that you have the values for 4♠, it might not be the best place to alight in game.

No it couldn't be a semi-splinter, we don't have that agreement. I was the one bidding 3♦ and I'll give a bit of time for others to put forward an opinion if they wish but it was the only reasonable forcing action I could think of at the time.

[Cyberyeti]

AL78, on 2022-December-16, 14:16, said:

No it couldn't be a semi-splinter, we don't have that agreement. I was the one bidding 3♦ and I'll give a bit of time for others to put forward an opinion if they wish but it was the only reasonable forcing action I could think of at the time.

What's your agreement about double over 2♦ ? to me 3♦ would be a good club raise.

I'm suspecting you actually have a strong NT without a diamond stop.

[AL78]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-16, 14:34, said:

What's your agreement about double over 2♦ ? to me 3♦ would be a good club raise.

I'm suspecting you actually have a strong NT without a diamond stop.

We haven't discussed that situation (sorry, we only play together once a month at most and my partner has been on vacation for the previous five weeks), but I would probably have something like a 5413 shape.

[AL78]

I have decided to post the full deal so you can see what I had and what happened. Cyberyeti was very close to estimating my hand:

---

Without the interference I would have bid 2NT showing 15-16 bal/semi-bal but can't do that without a diamond stop. 3♣ would have been non-forcing. I thus decided to cue bid firstly to establish a game force and secondly to ask partner for any further information to assist in deciding which game. If she takes it as a good hand with club support I am fine with that, otherwise it has to be forcing and asking for more information. The problem is she has one bid available and two pieces of information to show (a diamond stop and three card spade support). She decided to show her spades so I bid the spade game and after a diamond lead made 11 tricks.

This was worth 6/18 MPs in a field of 10.5 tables as four other pairs bid and made 3NTW+3 on a diamond lead.

Partner was disappointed we ended up in the wrong game and I tried to console her by saying the optimal piece of information to show is not obvious and it was not unreasonable to play in the spade game. With one diamond stop 3NT would have gone down and 4♠ would have made 10 tricks if the spades had broken 4-1.

[Cyberyeti]

AL78, on 2022-December-16, 14:59, said:

I have decided to post the full deal so you can see what I had and what happened. Cyberyeti was very close to estimating my hand:

---

Partner was disappointed we ended up in the wrong game and I tried to console her by saying the optimal piece of information to show is not obvious and it was not unreasonable to play in the spade game. With one diamond stop 3NT would have gone down and 4♠ would have made 10 tricks if the spades had broken 4-1.

Clubs would need to be 4-1 offside also, you have 3 spades, 3 clubs and 2 hearts, you are pratically always making 9 in NT although that will lose out to people making 10 in spades.

Once you know partner has a diamond stop, 6♣(W) comes into the equation, and in practice this makes easily.

[AL78]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-16, 15:25, said:

Clubs would need to be 4-1 offside also, you have 3 spades, 3 clubs and 2 hearts, you are pratically always making 9 in NT although that will lose out to people making 10 in spades.

Once you know partner has a diamond stop, 6♣(W) comes into the equation, and in practice this makes easily.

Sorry, miscounted, you always have eight on top and a ninth on a diamond lead.

[helene_t]

Partner will have 5-4 or better in the blacks, with other hands he could have doubled or bid hearts or nt or 3s.. It is tempting to bid 3n to protect dK against the Lead but I will just bid a normal 3s.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2022-December-16, 17:05, said:

Partner will have 5-4 or better in the blacks, with other hands he could have doubled or bid hearts or nt or 3s.. It is tempting to bid 3n to protect dK against the Lead but I will just bid a normal 3s.

If you're playing Acol with a weak NT where you open the major with 4M4m32 what do you do with AKxx, xx, xxx, AKQx ?

You either have to agree that 2N doesn't guarantee a stop, or that this hand type can double, but without that agreement ...

[helene_t]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-17, 03:08, said:

If you're playing Acol with a weak NT where you open the major with 4M4m32 what do you do with AKxx, xx, xxx, AKQx ?

You either have to agree that 2N doesn't guarantee a stop, or that this hand type can double, but without that agreement ...

OK good point yes 4-4 black is also possible although with less than gf strength I can't bid 3d. With this hand I would bid 3c or maybe dbl but add the q of spades and I would bid 3d. Partner willexpect 5 spades as 4 is exceptional.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2022-December-17, 04:47, said:

OK good point yes 4-4 black is also possible although with less than gf strength I can't bid 3d. With this hand I would bid 3c or maybe dbl but add the q of spades and I would bid 3d. Partner willexpect 5 spades as 4 is exceptional.

With less than GF strength you opened 1N

[helene_t]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-17, 04:59, said:

With less than GF strength you opened 1N

True, I must be sleeping. Yes you are right, the alternatives are dbl and 3di.

[helene_t]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-17, 04:59, said:

With less than GF strength you opened 1N

True, I must be sleeping. Yes you are right, the alternatives are dbl and 3di.

[helene_t]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-17, 04:59, said:

With less than GF strength you opened 1N

True, I must be sleeping. Yes you are right, the alternatives are dbl and 3di.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2022-December-17, 08:09, said:

True, I must be sleeping. Yes you are right, the alternatives are dbl and 3di.

Or you agree 2N (which is GF playing weak NT) doesn't show a diamond stop which is not as unreasonable as you might think (we actually play 2N as GF not necessarily balanced). Arguably you could agree 3N shows the stop and only 4 spades, 2N then 3N doesn't show the stop.

[AL78]

Cyberyeti, on 2022-December-17, 09:22, said:

Or you agree 2N (which is GF playing weak NT) doesn't show a diamond stop which is not as unreasonable as you might think (we actually play 2N as GF not necessarily balanced). Arguably you could agree 3N shows the stop and only 4 spades, 2N then 3N doesn't show the stop.

Doesn't that end up wrongsiding a NT contract in some cases?

[Cyberyeti]

AL78, on 2022-December-17, 11:06, said:

Doesn't that end up wrongsiding a NT contract in some cases?

It rarely does as in this case, but this is how we would bid the hand without the interference, except that we don't open the major with 4-4 so as it happens would wrongside clubs instead.

Our auction would be (there may be more bids between 3♠ and 4♠, I don't think we'd sniff 6♣)

1♠-2♣(2♦)
2N-3♥(nat 4♣/4♥)
3♠(5+♠)-4♠

[Lovera]

AL78, on 2022-December-16, 14:59, said:

I have decided to post the full deal so you can see what I had and what happened. Cyberyeti was very close to estimating my hand:

---

Without the interference I would have bid 2NT showing 15-16 bal/semi-bal but can't do that without a diamond stop. 3♣ would have been non-forcing. I thus decided to cue bid firstly to establish a game force and secondly to ask partner for any further information to assist in deciding which game. If she takes it as a good hand with club support I am fine with that, otherwise it has to be forcing and asking for more information. The problem is she has one bid available and two pieces of information to show (a diamond stop and three card spade support). She decided to show her spades so I bid the spade game and after a diamond lead made 11 tricks.

This was worth 6/18 MPs in a field of 10.5 tables as four other pairs bid and made 3NTW+3 on a diamond lead.

Partner was disappointed we ended up in the wrong game and I tried to console her by saying the optimal piece of information to show is not obvious and it was not unreasonable to play in the spade game. With one diamond stop 3NT would have gone down and 4♠ would have made 10 tricks if the spades had broken 4-1.

Yes, the contract is not what even E expected. It must be considered that if the pair reaches the slam when it has a double fit, it is advisable to choose the 4-4 fit because with the other suit, losers can be discarded. Perhaps it also depends a little on the Acol system (which I don't apply) because E has a hand of 12 points:2♣ does this show directly? But maybe we meet on 3♦ which should be UCB indicating the excellent support for ♣ contract that E would have played also having the King protected on the exit of N. But having W a 5-4-2-2 and however, being at the top of the second range it was clearer to bid 4♦(=almost game) which would probably have been followed by the cue of 4♥(=12/+ points) which could direct the auction.