BBO Discussion Forums: Getting to a major slam over 1 NT - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2

Getting to a major slam over 1 NT What is your preferred approach - IMPs

Poll: How to get to slam (16 member(s) have cast votes)

How would you proceed after 1NT

  1. Jacoby Transfer followed by jump to 6 (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. Deleted (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Jacoby followed by 2nd suit etc (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. Gerber followed by slam decision (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. Texas Transfer followed by cue bid (7 votes [43.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 43.75%

  6. Texas followed by Blackwood (2 votes [12.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.50%

  7. Jacoby followed by slam try jump to 4H (2 votes [12.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.50%

  8. Other option (5 votes [31.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.25%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   thepossum 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,362
  • Joined: 2018-July-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2019-June-16, 00:26

Sadly I took the wrong approach and was left in 4



regards P
0

#2 User is offline   smerriman 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,720
  • Joined: 2014-March-15
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2019-June-16, 01:42

I want to be in slam if and only if partner has a diamond control, which I can find out exactly by Texas followed by 4S.
1

#3 User is offline   MatthiasK 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 2010-October-19

Posted 2019-June-16, 01:43

A remark regarding your options: Jaboby transfer, then Blackwood doesn't exist. This is (should be) quantitative.

The hand looks too good for a slam invite. Partner would reject the invitation with some hands that look
minimum, where slam is very good or even cold, e.g. Kxx QJ KQJx Kxxx.

Ace ask doesn't help either. All I need is K and some tricks from partner.

The best option seems to be Texas transfer, then 4 cuebid. Whether this works depends on our
agreements and partner's judgement but it conveys the message that I have strong slam interest.
1

#4 User is offline   apollo1201 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,077
  • Joined: 2014-June-01

Posted 2019-June-16, 02:04

Wouldn’t any kind of transfer followed by 5H convey this quantitative invite message? Same as transfer followed by 4NT quantitative, except that it shows the 6th H and conveys if you’re max, please go on.

Over transfer and 4S cue, what will you do over 5C from partner. 5H then blame on partner? Would it be so clear you are that strong?
0

#5 User is online   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,896
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2019-June-16, 02:22

2 approaches, both reasonable, 1N-2-2-6 as this could easily make if they fail to take the 2 cashing tricks on the opening lead, or try science.

At MPs I blast the slam (winning the post mortem but pinpointing the diamond hole as you get a zero for 5= while everybody else makes overtricks or slams doesn't appeal).

At IMPs, both are valid, and also there's plenty of room for partner to have Kxx, Qxx, Axx, KQJx and you to have a cold 7N on opposite a pretty bad 1N.

This is actually one case where the old Acol 1N-3 makes this much easier than US methods.
0

#6 User is online   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,203
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2019-June-16, 02:28

View Postapollo1201, on 2019-June-16, 02:04, said:

Over transfer and 4S cue, what will you do over 5C from partner. 5H then blame on partner? Would it be so clear you are that strong?

5H, of course, and partner must continue if he controls diamonds which I just denied. If 4S showed slam interest then I can't have lost it because he showed a club control, and he now knows I must have first level club control too.
0

#7 User is online   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,203
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2019-June-16, 02:44

Deleted
0

#8 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2019-June-16, 02:53

Transfer then jump to 4, if you were playing positive cue bidding and not natural for this. This will elicit a diamond control if there is one, but it depends on your cue style I suppose, if this denies spades. I never did see the point in that, though, as you are not normally looking for slam with two suits of your own wide open, so therefore bid the one beneath you want to hear about.

But Cyberyeti's approach has appeal.
0

#9 User is offline   thepossum 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,362
  • Joined: 2018-July-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2019-June-16, 03:16

Thx everyone :)

Matthias is corrent that Blackwood over transfer did not exist - it was quantitative - I have deleted it

Regarding Texas I alays thought that it showed only game, not slam interest - but to be honest I forgot about it as always - it was a nice option since you could initiate the slam discussion

The interesting thing about Gerber is that in this case is acted as a transfer too since the response was 4H :)


PS I will post the hands later and it does potentially make 7H (with smart trump play and finesse) and 6NT - despite having a bad trump break. No idea what the correct odds are but I certainly did not want to be in 4H :(
0

#10 User is online   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,203
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2019-June-16, 03:23

View PostfromageGB, on 2019-June-16, 02:53, said:

Transfer then jump to 4, if you were playing positive cue bidding and not natural for this. This will elicit a diamond control if there is one, but it depends on your cue style I suppose, if this denies spades. I never did see the point in that, though, as you are not normally looking for slam with two suits of your own wide open, so therefore bid the one beneath you want to hear.

We would Jacoby transfer and then bid 3S, which shows a 6+card suit with slam interest and control in spades. For us, bidding clubs would deny spades and partner with no control of spades would sign off in trumps, even with control of diamonds. I can only see advantages in such honesty and precision, but to each his own. It's nice to be interested only in one suit, but hardly the norm, and the system will handle that case correctly anyway even without shortcuts.
0

#11 User is offline   MatthiasK 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 2010-October-19

Posted 2019-June-16, 04:06

View PostCyberyeti, on 2019-June-16, 02:22, said:

...
At IMPs, both are valid, and also there's plenty of room for partner to have Kxx, Qxx, Axx, KQJx and you to have a cold 7N on opposite a pretty bad 1N.

This is actually one case where the old Acol 1N-3 makes this much easier than US methods.


I'm not convinced.

With your sample hand, wouldn't opener rebid 4? You are in the same position as after Texas transfer.
In some cases, you wrong-side the slam, e.g., KQx QJx Kxxx KQx. You have to
hope that A is onside.
0

#12 User is online   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,896
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2019-June-16, 04:17

View PostMatthiasK, on 2019-June-16, 04:06, said:

I'm not convinced.

With your sample hand, wouldn't opener rebid 4? You are in the same position as after Texas transfer.
In some cases, you wrong-side the slam, e.g., KQx QJx Kxxx KQx. You have to
hope that A is onside.


We would always cue over 3 with 3 trumps to an honour, but yes it can wrongside the contract. (bear in mind that my system is weak NT based so the 3 bidder will be the strong hand)
0

#13 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2019-June-16, 04:39

Few quick thoughts

1. There is a lot to be said for the auction 1N - 6NT or 1N - 2 - 2 - 6

2. If you want to be scientific, the key issue is to identify whether partner has Kx in Diamonds and the Queen of Hearts. This will depend a lot on cue bidding style

3. If you plan to invite slam, Jacoby followed by 4M is the typical way to go. (However, I think that you are too strong for this)
Alderaan delenda est
0

#14 User is offline   rmnka447 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,366
  • Joined: 2012-March-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois
  • Interests:Bridge, Golf, Soccer

Posted 2019-June-16, 07:35

As always, the first thing to ask yourself if thinking slam is possible is "What do we need to know before we bid slam?" The obvious first issue is whether there are 2 possible losers. That should push you toward cue bidding to identify if the control exists.

So I support a Jacoby transfer followed by 4 . 4 should be a cue bid in this sequence. If you have a real suit along with , the proper sequence would be to transfer and then bid 3 .

Texas transfers are usually just game oriented. But many good players now use Texas followed by 4 NT as the keycard ask. So Jacoby followed by 4 NT is always quantitative. It also eases the possible confusion about what 4 means in Jacoby sequences. 4 can't be Gerber with the keycard ask available through Texas.

If you use Texas as strictly game interest outside of the keycard ask sequence, then a Jacoby transfer followed by jump to game ought to show at least some mild slam interest.

I know lots of players like to use 3 M over 1 NT to describe various hands. I guess I'm the dinosaur in that I like to play 1 NT - 3 M as slammish bids so that responder can play the hand. Make the hand something like Kxx AKQ10xx xx Ax and this would be a good candidate for this bid as you want to protect the control.
1

#15 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,068
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2019-June-16, 17:25

Texas followed by 4, as smerriman suggests, is the normal auction.

At matchpoints you might consider just blasting 6NT, but I am not sure about this. Sometimes you lose to Q and need to discard a loser from the hand before drawing trumps. And sometimes partner has Kx and the spade ruff is the 13th trick. So maybe 6 is the best contract at any scoring.

The chance that we are missing A and Q is higher than the chance that we are missing AK, so maybe asking for keycards is worthwhile. But even if we are missing Q, it may be finessable. OTOH, asking keycards has the added advantage that it doesn't help opps find the diamond lead. Then again, if we stop in 5 the lead probably doesn't matter so much at IMPs.

There's also the issue that a transfer allows LHO to double to ask for a diamond lead. But, unless we play South African Texas, which we apparently don't, there is no attractive way to avoid this. One could:
- Punt 6. But the contract is often better placed in partner's hand, for example if he has Kx(xx) or KJ(xx). On the other hand, if partner has QJ(xx) in eitherr black suit, the contract may play better in our hand.
- Punt 6NT. But as mentioned I think 6 is a better contract.
- Jacoby followed by 6, as 2 is less likely to be doubled than 4. But opps might know this.

All in all, there are many reasonable ways to bid this. Mark me down for 4 followed by 4.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
1

#16 User is offline   thepossum 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,362
  • Joined: 2018-July-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2019-June-16, 18:26

Thankyou for everyone's comments

Here are the four hands with my auction. Sadly as has been pointed out the 4H wasnt a strong enough bid and was passed by North in this case. North had a very nice fit for everything, despite the 4-0 heart break

regards P


0

#17 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2019-June-16, 18:46

View Postrmnka447, on 2019-June-16, 07:35, said:

So I support a Jacoby transfer followed by 4 . 4 should be a cue bid in this sequence.


Am I just super old- fashioned to play this as a splinter?
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
2

#18 User is offline   thepossum 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,362
  • Joined: 2018-July-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2019-June-16, 18:56

I think Jacoby followed by 4C was a splinter and not a cue in the system (GiB 2/1) I was playing. I think I checked all cue bid options after Jacoby and they were not available

Cue bids (4S etc) were available after Texas 4H

Note also, I checked that if you do a quantitative 4NT after Jacoby 2H, then North bid to 6H but that seems a rather ill defined sequence

There was also a quantitative 5NT available, inviting to 7NT which resulted in 6H also

A few players also bid a second suit after the Jacoby transfer to force the auction
0

#19 User is offline   Tramticket 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,070
  • Joined: 2009-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kent (Near London)

Posted 2019-June-17, 01:55

View PostCyberyeti, on 2019-June-16, 02:22, said:

This is actually one case where the old Acol 1N-3 makes this much easier than US methods.


I agree and this would be my approach. But I think that a natural 1NT-3 works better opposite a weak NT than a strong NT.

View PostCyberyeti, on 2019-June-16, 02:22, said:

At MPs I blast the slam (winning the post mortem but pinpointing the diamond hole as you get a zero for 5= while everybody else makes overtricks or slams doesn't appeal).


I tend to dislike this approach, as opponents always seem to find the right lead against me. I particularly dislike blasting slam here, because you don't know which slam to blast - do you blast 6 and find that you are losing MPs to pairs who bid scientifically to 6NT or blast 6NT and find that it goes down when 6 would make?
0

#20 User is online   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,203
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2019-June-17, 02:08

View PostVampyr, on 2019-June-16, 18:46, said:

Am I just super old- fashioned to play this as a splinter?

Just a bit irrational, I think. You're much more likely to have a useful A or K to show than a singleton or void, which you can still show with a control bid anyway. This is your most economical way of fixing trumps and initiating slam investigation so it makes sense to exploit it fully.
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2


Fast Reply

  

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users