Slams we bid
1.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
1♥ - 2♣ - pass - 2♦
pass - 2♥ - Dbl - 3♠?
pass - 4♥ - pass - 5♠
pass - 6♦ - pass - pass
pass
Result: 6♦=
A sharp one on the first day. We weren't sure about the 3♠ bid, but we both considered it to be natural. We have numerous ways of supporting partner's ♣s, and an autosplinter wouldn't make much sense.
Bidding 2♠ followed by another cuebid and 3♠ wouldn't necessarily show 5-6, so we agreed (afterwards) that this sequence above should be natural with 5♠ and 6♦.
2.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents were silent:
1♣! - 2♥!
3♥! - 3NT!
4♣! - 4♦!
4NT! - 5♦!
6♣! - 7♥
1♣ = 14+ natural or 15+ balanced (no 5M), F1
2♥ = GF, 6+♥
3♥ = sets, 3+♥
3NT = minimum hand, no ♠ cue
4♣ = ♠ cue and ♣ cue, slam interest
4♦ = cue
4NT = odd number of keycards (3 or 5 in this sequence), ♠ cue
5♦ = 1st round cue, no 1st or 2nd ♣ cue
6♣ = shows trump Q, interest in grand slam if I have a 3rd round control ♣
Result: 7♥=
Always fun to bid a sharp grand slam on vugraph against the team that would eventually win the tournament.
3.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
1♠! - pass - 2♥! - 2NT!
Dbl - 3♣ - 3♠ - pass
4♣! - pass - 4♦! - Dbl
4♥! - pass - 4NT! pass
6♠ - pass - pass - pass
1♠ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2♥ = GF, natural
Dbl = ready to penalize
4♣ = cue, serious slam interest
4♦ = cue
4♥ = cue (yes we cuebid singletons in partner's suit), no ♦ cue
4NT = shows even number of keycards (2 or 4 in this sequence)
6♠ = poor bid
Result: 6♠= (7♠ makes however)
I pushed a bit (showing serious slam interest) when I found out opps had a ♣ fit. This was justified, but for some reason I didn't investigate grand anymore. I must have been distracted because I'm always mad if my partner bids like this opposite an unlimited hand...
4.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents were silent:
2♥! - 2♠!
3♦! - 3♥!
3♠! - 3NT!?
4♣! - 4♦!
4♥! - 4♠!
5♦! - 5♥!?
6♥?
2♥ = 10-13HCP, natural, unbalanced
2♠ = relay, usually GF
3♦ = natural, 0-2♠
3♥ = sets trump, at least light slam interest
3♠ = cue
3NT = light slam interest (???)
4♣ = cue
4♦ = cue
4♥ = also light slam interest
4♠ = even number of keycards (2 or 4 in this sequence)
5♦ = cue
5♥ = no ♥Q
We had a bit of a misunderstanding here. Showing only light slaminterest with South's hand is imo an underbid. After this, North never gave South 4 keycards, especially when he bid 5♥ later on. North showed slam interest with only 1 keycard, so South could've done more by bidding 5NT. This should show lots of keycards without the trump Queen, why else bid like this? 6♥ was a gamble, since North gave South only 2 keycards, but didn't know if he had ♠A or not.
Result: 6♥+1 (7♥ could've been bid imo)
5.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents silent:
1♠! - 2NT!
3♣! - 4♣!
6♠
1♠ = 14+HCP, natural, F1
2NT = invite with fit, or GF with a void
3♣ = relay
4♣ = void splinter
6♠ = didn't think grand slam was possible
Result: 6♠+1 after a weird ♣ lead! Otherwise ♥K has to be found to make grand slam.
6.
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Opponents were silent:
1NT! - 2♦!
2♥! - 3♠!
3NT - 4♥?
6NT
1NT = (11)12-14HCP, balanced or semi balanced
2♦ = transfer, 4+♥
2♥ = no good hand with 4♥
3♠ = GF, 4♥, 5+♦
3NT = no fit
4♥ = North thought he showed 5♥ and 6♦, while South thought he showed an even number of keycards with ♦ as trumps
This was bid on the final day, where we didn't have anything to win or to lose. A bidding misunderstanding made sure we were in a ridiculous contract, but that didn't mean we didn't made the best out of it. When my hand came down, I told partner to play a bit fast if he was going down for sure. I knew the chance of success was pretty small, but this feeling got confirmed when partner immediately started playing with an enormous tempo!
Conclusion: we went down in only 1 slam which we bid without much concentration, but we missed some (lucky) grands as well. Note that all of these slams made on distribution rather than HCP! This proves yet again that evaluating the hand is the most important, and points are only useful to a certain degree.
2 comments:
What's your experience of Turbo? I have the greatest respect for Fantoni (-Nunes) but I don't think that's a convention that serves most players.
Have you seen the Parity KC on my blog?
/Ulf
I had a post about Kickback turbo:
http://freebridge.blogspot.com/2006/12/kickback-turbo.html
When we first experimented with Turbo, we got into trouble a lot of times. Especially in the minor suits, bidding slam was a bit of a guess because we didn't know the location of the trump Queen.
We now use Kickback Turbo in almost all our slam auctions. We usually get good results, accurate cuebidding, and it's imo more precise than RKC followed by some asking bid. (for example you can still ask for a 3rd round control, or "something extra")
However I have to admit that we sometimes struggle when one of us has a void. It's not always clear for one player or another to know if there's a void in play or not, you can't always show it, partner still shows his keycard in that suit,... Sometimes RKC would be more useful, but it's as good as impossible to combine both conventions.
At the moment, I feel very comfortable and happy with Kickback Turbo. I sometimes wonder how Fantoni and Nunes can manage with the standard version of Turbo in all their auctions.
Post a Comment