[DavidKok]

This is a bidding problem with multiple rounds, and you get to play wherever you end up. I'll share my agreements along the way.

With a nice unbalanced hand you have a surprisingly uncontested auction.

---

Do you agree with the auction thus far? It might be relevant that 3♣ can still be 4=2=2=5 with this partner.
Your options now are:

• 3NT: A non-serious slam try.
  
• 4♣: A serious slam try with club control.
  
• 4♦: A serious slam try denying a club control and showing a diamond control.
  
• 4♥: A strange bid. A serious slam try with no minor suit control. In principle 'last train', but that does not make sense with bypassing 3NT.
  
• 4♠: Signoff, the weakest 5-10% of hands we could have on the auction.
  
• 4NT: RKC Blackwood 1430 for spades.

Your call?

[smerriman]

AQxx of spades and the A of hearts already makes a slam look pretty good. So it seems serious enough to start with 4♣.

[Tramticket]

What does FSF followed by 3♠ show? Presumably it is four spades rather than three spades prepared to play in a Moysian? And it shows a hand too strong to raise spades by any other route? What options did partner have to raise spades?

But assuming it is very strong with four spades, we can't do less than cue-bid 4♣, although this might not be particularly helpful if we get a 4♦ cue bid in return.

The practical bid is probably to ask for key cards with 4NT.

[awm]

It is a nice treatment to reverse 2♠ and 3♣ by opener here; the 5-6 hand is rare and this allows responder to agree clubs at the three level instead of being forced to decide whether to bypass 3nt.

Anyway it does not matter here since we are playing in spades. 4♣ seems clear with a prime 14 and the sixth club. Something like AQxx in each major offers good play for slam and surely partner signs off opposite “non-serious” with this.

[DavidKok]

Tramticket, on 2024-December-03, 03:00, said:

What does FSF followed by 3♠ show? Presumably it is four spades rather than three spades prepared to play in a Moysian? And it shows a hand too strong to raise spades by any other route? What options did partner have to raise spades?

But assuming it is very strong with four spades, we can't do less than cue-bid 4♣, although this might not be particularly helpful if we get a 4♦ cue bid in return.

The practical bid is probably to ask for key cards with 4NT.

Yes, it is a game force with (at least) four spades. Partner also had a simple raise (2♠), invitational raise (3♠), preemptive shape-raise (4♠), diamond splinter (4♦) and non-raises available. Partner did not have a way to splinter in clubs. 3♦ is undiscussed and therefore does not exist.

awm, on 2024-December-03, 03:05, said:

It is a nice treatment to reverse 2♠ and 3♣ by opener here; the 5-6 hand is rare and this allows responder to agree clubs at the three level instead of being forced to decide whether to bypass 3nt.

I agree, and more generally think there is room for improvement on 4SGF auctions by utilising a low bid as the punt, even if this requires artificiality. Unfortunately we do not play this.

[Cyberyeti]

The problem here is trying to get partner to show a heart control, rather than a diamond control.

The best I think I can do is to bid 4♣, if partner bids 4♦, I bid 4♠ emphasizing the heart hole. I might not want to do this at MPs as it might guarantee a heart lead and a poor score.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-03, 04:25, said:

Yes, it is a game force with (at least) four spades. Partner also had a simple raise (2♠), invitational raise (3♠), preemptive shape-raise (4♠), diamond splinter (4♦) and non-raises available. Partner did not have a way to splinter in clubs. 3♦ is undiscussed and therefore does not exist.

What is 1♣-1♥-1♠-4♣ for you ? 3♦ is a diamond splinter for many including us, although whether you would want to use it with a stiff ace is debatable.

[DavidKok]

I think you may be thinking of the other hand with regards to the diamond splinter remark.

That 4♣ bid would be a shapely slam try setting clubs. Somewhat redundant as 2♦-then-4♣ is also a slam try setting clubs.
What it most definitely isn't is a club splinter for spades. Splintering in partner's long suit is a mess, especially if partner still has not limited their range that much.

As always, keep in mind that you need a bid for every hand, not a hand for every bid. A lot of jumps are unused or underused, simply because a cheaper satisfactory bid exists that gives us more information en route.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-03, 06:11, said:

I think you may be thinking of the other hand with regards to the diamond splinter remark.

That 4♣ bid would be a shapely slam try setting clubs. Somewhat redundant as 2♦-then-4♣ is also a slam try setting clubs.
What it most definitely isn't is a club splinter for spades. Splintering in partner's long suit is a mess, especially if partner still has not limited their range that much.

As always, keep in mind that you need a bid for every hand, not a hand for every bid. A lot of jumps are unused or underused, simply because a cheaper satisfactory bid exists that gives us more information en route.

Splintering in partner's long suit when you have a fit can be valuable, and there are clear times when bids have to be that 1♣-1♠-3♠-5♣ voidwood is an auction we've had a couple of times.

Yes I had the wrong hand, but 3♦ would still be a splinter agreeing spades for us.

My view was that since any hand that wanted to set clubs could go thru 2♦, then 4♣ ought to be a splinter, possibly specifically a void.

[DavidKok]

I understand, and I think that is a common mistake.

For the sake of argument, even if we did have a club splinter, void or no, available there are hands with short clubs, spade support and slam interest that are unsuitable for consuming all this bidding space that way. The negative inferences are limited anyway, so I'd like to ask you to go along with me disregarding that gadget even if you think it is very useful.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-03, 06:46, said:

I understand, and I think that is a common mistake.

For the sake of argument, even if we did have a club splinter, void or no, available there are hands with short clubs, spade support and slam interest that are unsuitable for consuming all this bidding space that way. The negative inferences are limited anyway, so I'd like to ask you to go along with me disregarding that gadget even if you think it is very useful.

Oh for the purposes of this auction I have to play your system. For reference the hand I remember that bid the voidwood auction 1♣-1♠-3♠-5♣ was KQJxxx, x, KQJxxx, void partner has the 3 aces and ♣ Qxxxx.

I've already said I bid 4♣ at the critical point playing your methods.

Do you have any agreements about what it means if you make a non serious slam try, partner signs off and you bid on anyway ?

[Tramticket]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-03, 04:25, said:

Yes, it is a game force with (at least) four spades. Partner also had a simple raise (2♠), invitational raise (3♠), preemptive shape-raise (4♠), diamond splinter (4♦) and non-raises available. Partner did not have a way to splinter in clubs. 3♦ is undiscussed and therefore does not exist.

Given that 4♠ is pre-emptive, partner will have to follow this FSF route with almost all game-forcing hands, partner's minimum might be a balanced 12/13 with four hearts and four spades? In that case, I think that 4♣, followed by 4♠ over the likely 4♦ is probably enough. As Cyberyeti says, it does pin-point the lead though.

For what it's worth, we would play the 4♠ as a genuine values raise rather than a pre-empt. Thus FSF followed by spade support would show a trick more than this.

[mike777]

4C , looking for grand in spades or no trump.


AQxx..AKxxx..xxx...K
AQxx..Axxxx..Kxx. K

[akwoo]

I bid 4♣. I'm not worried about the 4♣-4♦-4♠ auction - if partner can't go on after that when I made a serious slam try, we don't have slam.

[DavidKok]

Over your 4♣ partner bids 4♥, last train. This denies a diamond control and neither confirms nor denies a heart control. It normally shows a hand with some extras but not enough to take charge, in this case presumably for lack of a diamond control regardless of strength. On this auction though, since we made a serious slam try partner will cooperate even with a minimum if it helps clarify the control situation. Even though the agreement is 'last train' it is therefore more accurate to say that this bid shows either a last train hand or a heart control.

---

The options here are:

• 4♠: signoff. Partner will expect that we don't have a diamond control, and will never bid on.
  
• 4NT: RKC 1430 for spades.
  
• 5♣: A first round club control and shows a diamond control, asks partner to clarify further.
  
• 5♦: A first round diamond control and only a second round club control, asks partner to clarify further.

Your bid?

[mike777]

4NT over 5S will bid 5NT specific Kings
Over 6C will Bid 6D showing, KD A LIE, OVER 6H will bid 7NT..
After 6C just a matter between 7S or 7NT

Fwiw partner has denied a minimum gf hand not once but twice. After 3S see above post for pretty minimum in context examples.

I would add I don't play last train or know it. But I love the song,love the Monkees and saw them in concert, great show..
Probably one of the very first records I ever bought with my hard earned paper route money 😄

Both examples are adjusted 6
LTC.

[Cyberyeti]

My problem with Blackwood is that 2 without is not good news. Can partner have 2 without and not have K♣ ? AJxx, AJxxx, QJx, x for example ? Even then slam is not terrible although worse than a finesse and any improvement on that makes it much better.

Also one with, is it AQJx, KQxxx, xxx, K or Qxxx, AKQxx, QJx, x

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-December-03, 14:32, said:

My problem with Blackwood is that 2 without is not good news. Can partner have 2 without and not have K♣ ? AJxx, AJxxx, QJx, x for example ? Even then slam is not terrible although worse than a finesse and any improvement on that makes it much better.

Also one with, is it AQJx, KQxxx, xxx, K or Qxxx, AKQxx, QJx, x

good news partner has denied all three examples. If not then we need to talk. 😞❤️

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2024-December-03, 14:44, said:

good news partner has denied all three examples. If not then we need to talk. 😞❤️

You seem to think they've shown a much bigger hand than I do, I don't think they've shown much above a game force, just not dead minimum.

I don't play these methods, 3N would be a heart cue for me, so when I bid 4♣ I'm showing a club control without a heart control.

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-December-03, 14:53, said:

You seem to think they've shown a much bigger hand than I do, I don't think they've shown much above a game force, just not dead minimum.

I don't play these methods, 3N would be a heart cue for me, so when I bid 4♣ I'm showing a club control without a heart control.

Yes much more, minimum gf is generally 7 LTC, hands:

1. 8.5 adjusted LTC
2. 7.5 adjusted LTC
3. 7.0 adjusted LTC