Pick a suit and a level

[Fluffy]

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sahak10xda9xxcqjxx]133|100| E - S - W - N

1♠-X-4♠-4NT

ps-??[/hv]

[inquiry]

Not knowing my partners style, I am a little in a bind. The takeout duble suggest they have 11 card fit (at least). Would partner double with x-QJTx KQxx KTxx, could have have less than this, say by the queen of diamonds? Mot knowing any o of the cast of characters I will bid 5NT, pick a slam rather than risk we are off the ♣ACE.

 

IF my mother had made the takeout double, I would bid 7NT and ask west not to psyche against us anymore, because the hand I drew up isn't even close to enough for her to double for takeout.

[Al_U_Card]

I like 5S for all the right messages it sends.....rock crusher, choice of slams, control of S (not clear if void or ace) our 9 card fit should produce a slam but I don't like NT for the S lead and then C entry possibilities ;)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

5C

 

Partner did ask for a minor, the heart suit,

he could have bid by himself.

 

The only question is do you drive toward slam,

and I say no.

Most likely the slam will be at 50% best (they

did open the bidding, didn't they?)

 

It is a style issue, but I prefer to go plus.

 

Marlowe

[Fluffy]

IF my mother had made the takeout double, I would bid 7NT and ask west not to psyche against us anymore, because the hand I drew  up isn't even close to enough for her to double for takeout.

The take out double was made bya member of your family Ben, it wasn't you mother though, it was yourself ;) (or at least you in the problem)

[awm]

I'd try 5NT, punting the decision back to partner one level higher. Slam is certainly possible on this hand; partner could have something like:

 

x

xx

KQxxx

Axxxx

 

This is only nine points, leaving 13 for opponents. I don't think west really needs any values for a non-vulnerable 4♠ bid holding five or six trumps. Even if we give partner a slightly weaker hand, slam should have some play. In this case it may be better to play from partner's side, since the 4♠ bidder is fairly likely to have a singleton somewhere and I'd rather make opener try to lead it than give west the easy lead.

 

Is a grand slam possible? Assuming east didn't psych, I think probably not so much. However, there does exist a takeout double hand that would make a grand slam a live possibility:

 

-

AKTx

Axxxx

KQJx

 

I'd expect 5♠ (seemingly a grand slam try) to show a spade void in a hand more like this one.

[luke warm]

is 5S too over the top? i'd rather partner pick the suit if possible.. now if he bids 5NT i guess i'll say 6C

[cherdano]

I prefer 5N over 5♠ because partner can't pass the blame back to me for picking a suit.

 

Arend

[mikeh]

5♣ is enough.

 

Partner was bidding under pressure and you send precisely the wrong message if you force to slam opposite xx x Kxxxx Kxxxx.

 

Yes, you may make it, but it is a bad contract. What if he holds xx x Qxxxx Axxxx?

 

I would like partner to bid 4N with either of those hands. If we fail in 5minor (on hands with a more typical takeout double), it won't be by much and 4♠ may then be making. One does not have to work hard to come up with hands on which a double game swing exists.

 

BTW, partner is showing the minors, but may be about to pull 5♣ to 5♦, and now I would think seriously about raising: a position which is not inconsistent with 5♣. Give partner a stiff ♣, and we rate to have a play: xx QJxx KJxxxx x

 

or xx Jxxxx KQxxxx void are example hands for that sequence.

 

Yes, we may be missing a cold slam, but I believe that the majority of experts abide by the rule that one does not stretch for slam when the opps preempt. Obviously, there are hands that would cause me to bid 5♠ here (or 5N, but I have the ♠A, so if I bid to slam, it is 5♠). Make my ♣ the KQ, and I'd bid 5♠ (brave, aren't I? :P )

[awm]

While it may be true that most experts do not stretch for slam opposite preempting opponents, it's also true that most experts don't bid to the five level over four with the intent of going two down at equal vulnerability.

 

With this in mind, I'd judge that partner should expect a 5-level contract to go at most one down opposite a typical takeout double. With 1444 shape (and partner may well be able to work out the singleton spade from the bidding) I would certainly double on most 11-counts and some 10s, and I think this is fairly standard.

 

The actual hand is 18 high, or approximately two tricks better than I've promised. If partner thinks we can likely play 5-minor one down when I hold:

 

x

AKxx

Axxx

xxxx

 

Why don't I think the extra ♣QJ and ♠A constitute two more tricks?

 

If partner holds something like xx x Kxxxx Kxxxx, well that is a dead minimum (and requires some luck to get -1 in 5-minor opposite the hand above). Opposite the real hand we will need a diamond break for slam, but slam is certainly not awful. And I suspect partner would bid the same way if we add the diamond queen...

[cherdano]

Yes, we may be missing a cold slam, but I believe that the majority of experts abide by the rule that one does not stretch for slam when the opps preempt. Obviously, there are hands that would cause me to bid 5♠ here (or 5N, but I have the ♠A, so if I bid to slam, it is 5♠). Make my ♣ the KQ, and I'd bid 5♠ (brave, aren't I? :P )

Well, you know expert bidding certainly better than me, but I am not sure this rule applies here. If ONE opponent preempts with, say, 4♠, we have to expect bad breaks in the other 3 suits. Even worse, if one opponent makes a two-suited preempt. This argues for caution.

 

Here, spades may well divide 5-5 among the opponents. This would make the chances for good suit breaks in the remaining suits even better than a priori. (Of course, this is a little mitigated by the fact that those who don't follow the LAW blindly may not raise to 4 with a 5332 pattern, and are thus likely to have a shortness somewhere. Depends a little on opponent's style.)

 

Arend

[joker_gib]

Maybe 5♣ is enough but I can't resist to 5♠ (why shoud I bid 5NT with the ♠A :P )

 

Alain

[whereagles]

If pard is solid: 5♠, confirming a 3-suiter with 1st round spade control and inviting to a grand slam.

If pard is semi-solid: 5NT, asking for his best suit, without hopes of a grand.

If pard is an overbidder: I would be considering a pass!! But ok, just bid 5♣ to try and play there.

[Fluffy]

5♣ is enough.

 

Partner was bidding under pressure and you send precisely the wrong message if you force to slam opposite xx x Kxxxx Kxxxx.

 

Yes, you may make it, but it is a bad contract. What if he holds xx x Qxxxx Axxxx?

What if he has xx Qxxxx x Kxxxx?

[mikeh]

5♣ is enough.

 

Partner was bidding under pressure and you send precisely the wrong message if you force to slam opposite xx x Kxxxx Kxxxx.

 

Yes, you may make it, but it is a bad contract. What if he holds xx x Qxxxx Axxxx?

What if he has xx Qxxxx x Kxxxx?

he should bid 5♥ with that hand.

 

Reading the posts so far, it seems to me that the difference between the conservative 5♣ bidders and the majority slam bidders lies in the expectations we have for partner.

 

We all recognize that we have an unusually good hand for partner. If he is bidding 4N with an expectation of making a 5-level contract, then our hand has to force to slam.

 

I do not expect partner to have that good a hand. I am not saying that he won't! I am saying, only, that he may be thinking that his 5-level adventure is going to be a save: perhaps failing by 2 tricks opposite an indifferent dummy.

 

In that case, is my hand 3 tricks better than it might be? I don't think so. My expectation is that partner will be pleased to find that his save attempt turned into a make.

 

While I expect that slam will make a good deal of the time, I am willing to forgo that in order that partner continue making aggressive bids in this situation. I do not want partner to feel reluctant to bid out of fear that I will overbid.

 

In case it is not already obvious, I do concede that I have been accused of being a conservative bidder before this B)

[han]

Adam's response looks convincing, I'd opt for either 5S or 5NT. I actually prefer 5NT so that partner can't endplay me with 5NT.

[Al_U_Card]

Adam's response looks convincing, I'd opt for either 5S or 5NT. I actually prefer 5NT so that partner can't endplay me with 5NT.

Your pards do that, to YOU? B) We haven't played together....YET lol

[inquiry]

IF my mother had made the takeout double, I would bid 7NT and ask west not to psyche against us anymore, because the hand I drew  up isn't even close to enough for her to double for takeout.

The take out double was made bya member of your family Ben, it wasn't you mother though, it was yourself B) (or at least you in the problem)

Whoops.. I misread the silly thing... ok.. I do have a good double... but not that great of one. I bid 5♣'s here.

[awm]

On the partnership trust issue, yes it cuts both ways. If partner hangs me everytime I stretch for a bid under pressure this will certainly be frustrating and bad for partnership (as mikeh says).

 

On the other hand, if partner never raises my calls even when his hand is two tricks better than promised, he's basically assuming that I never have values for my bids. Seems to me this will also get somewhat frustrating and be bad for the partnership in the long run. To give one example, a partner and I had the auction (I'm dealer): Pass-1♠-Pass-1NT-Pass-2♣-Pass-2♠. Partner had chosen to pass with a balanced fifteen count. At this point I made a very aggressive (one might say suicidal) pre-balancing call on a balanced ten. Partner bid only 3♦, I guess "making allowances for me being under pressure" and we missed a cold 3NT game. I think this sort of incident was just as bad for our partnership as it would have been had partner hung me. In fact, when I make ludicrously aggressive bids, I expect to get too high every once in a while! But if I make a ludicrously aggressive call and yet partner and I end up too low then I become rather frustrated.

 

The key to this hand would seem to be what partner expects to happen when he bids 4NT. It seems to me that if partner expects there to be no play for one down opposite a normal takeout double, then he's the one bidding more than he should. If partner thinks down one will have play opposite a normal double, then making six should have play opposite the real hand. I'm willing to underbid my hand by one trick since partner was under pressure -- I will not underbid my hand by two.

[Fluffy]

This time partner held....

 

 

[hv=s=sxxhqxxxxdj10xxxcx]133|100|[/hv]

 

 

Nobody followed my 5♦ bid, planing to bid slam only if partner had ♥+♣ :P.

[whereagles]

ahhh an overbidder. Glad I bid 5♣ :P

[Al_U_Card]

This time partner held....

 

 

[hv=s=sxxhqxxxxdj10xxxcx]133|100|[/hv]

 

 

Nobody followed my 5♦ bid, planing to bid slam only if partner had ♥+♣ :P.

He couldn't bid 5H to play?

[Fluffy]

This time partner held....

 

 

Dealer: ????? Vul: ???? Scoring: Unknown

♠ xx ♥ Qxxxx ♦ J10xxx ♣ x

 

 

Nobody followed my 5♦ bid, planing to bid slam only if partner had ♥+♣ :P.

He couldn't bid 5H to play?

sure, but 9 trumps often play better than 8 at teh 5 level. Mostly because the 8 card suit is harder to be ruffed.

[beatrix45]

:( Earth to BBO forum members. A full one-third of the forum responders want to stop at game DESPITE HAVING AN ACE AND A KING EXTRA.

 

I really like the suggestion to bid 5♠ as a way to get to a small slam while suggesting that a grand might be there, albeit not often, maybe one time in twenty.

 

 

P.S. AAAAAARGH! I just went back through the postings saw partner's actual hand. How can you play bridge with a partner who bids like that?? I hope it's for money, because it certainly isn't good for your bridge game to play opposite looney tunes whose bids are just random efforts.

[Al_U_Card]

This time partner held....

 

 

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> ????? </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> ???? </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> Unknown </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> Qxxxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> J10xxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> x </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->

 

 

Nobody followed my 5♦ bid, planing to bid slam only if partner had ♥+♣ ;).

He couldn't bid 5H to play?

sure, but 9 trumps often play better than 8 at teh 5 level. Mostly because the 8 card suit is harder to be ruffed.

not sure I follow. aren't both red suits 9 card fits? And opposite the t/o dbl that pard SHOULD have (4H cards and an ace better than an opening hand) I would think that 5H is the only option, hoping that the presumed dbl fit produces enough tricks to make.