Assuming that the example auction 1N-2H-2S-3C is game forcing and
ostenibly natural, then I prefer a simple approach. The top priority
is to always bid 3 of responder's major with 3 or 4 cards in the
suit. Otherwise:
1. bid a new suit at the 3 level
This shows an ace in the suit and sup****t for responder's second suit
(four+ cards or three to a good honor).
2. bid 3N
3. bid a new suit at the 4 level.
This also shows an ace in the suit and sup****t for responder's second
suit (not applicable in this example)
4. raise responder's second suit to the 4 level with no available cue
bid
I strive to avoid rebidding at the 4 level in this sequence,
especially at matchpoints, in order to keep 3N in play. In addition,
responder's second suit might be intended mainly as an advanced cue
with a slam try in the major, and therefore might not be 4+ cards.
This is often the case with bids in the minors when they are a second
or third suit.
John Hoffman
On Apr 23, 9:25 am, Henry Lockwood <henry.lockw...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Last night I was in the unusual situation of holding:
>
> AKJxxxx
> Q
> -
> KTxxx
>
> Partner, in second seat, opened 1NT (12-14). RHO passed, and I
> started with a transfer to S. Partner completed the transfer, and I
> rebid 3C (game-forcing with slam interest). Happy so far?
>
> What are the best continuations from this point? Obviously, on this
> hand I want to know about aces; if partner has the two relevant aces I
> want to know about the SQ to bid the grand. On other hands e.g. KQxxx/
> AK/x/KQxxx I'm still considering slam, and still interested in aces,
> but I also want to know which of my suits partner prefers.
>
> It seems to me that partner should bid S without controls, and should
> cue-bid otherwise. Should we enter a control-showing auction even
> though we're not necessarily certain which suit to play?
> Alternatively, how can we carry on without risking getting too high?
>
> -----------
>
> On the night, the auction went:
> 1N-2H
> 2S-3C
> 3H-4D-(X)
> 4H-(5D)-6S
>
> By this stage, it was clear to me that we'd lost our way a bit; we
> were vul. vs not, and I just had to hope partner had one of the
> relevant aces. We got lucky; partner did have both aces (he'd
> intended 3H as natural, showing a 4-card suit, and had taken 4D as
> 4sf, and 4H was a cue-bid) and the SQxx were offside. One pair played
> in 6C making, one in 5DX the other way (1100, but not as good a result
> as it deserved), one more in 6S and a couple in 6NT (oops?). There
> were a couple of pairs in 4S.
|
