Roman jump hand.

[DrTodd13]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxxhxdxxxxxckqjxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

- 2♠ by west.

- 4♦ by pd showing GF hand with ♥+♦, passed to you.[/hv]

 

What's your call?

[mike777]

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxxhxdxxxxxckqjxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

- 2♠ by west.

- 4♦ by pd showing GF hand with ♥+♦, passed to you.[/hv]

 

What's your call?

5D

 

I note east passed.

[pclayton]

5♦. My clubs could be worthless, or they could be great. Lets put pard on a 4-5 loser hand with at least a doubleton spade, since RHO didn't raise:

 

Ax, AKxxx, AQxxx, x

xx, AKQxx, AKxxx, x

Ax, AKxxx, KJxxxx, void

Ax, AJTxx, AQJxx, x

 

Only #3 gives us a real good play for slam. #1 is OK, but #2 and #4 probably won't make a game even.

 

If pard has a better hand; we'll talk about our methods a little more.

[whereagles]

5♦. Hate to bid that on a hand that could have been, say,

 

xxxx

xx

xxx

xxxx

 

but I don't think I have a better bid ;)

[mikeh]

5♦.

 

Any other call is pure speculation. I like the jump to be a GOOOOD hand, but why does it have to be good enough for slam: x AKQJx AKQJxx x is far more than the minimum I'd have and slam is silly opposite that. Or (based on RHO's silence) Qxx AKQJx AKQJx void?

 

What's that old saying, attributed to Hamman but surely used by many, many players over the years: don't play me for the perfect hand... I don't have it.

 

 

Passing is even sillier... on these auctions, I'd rather be in 5♦ -1 than 4♦ making, just so partner will trust me in the future.

 

And if he has Ax AKQJx AKQJxx void, we avoid an odd-looking score of +190...

 

Is that the question? Is 4♦ forcing? I play it as forcing...too bad if we go down.

[DrTodd13]

I think I said that we play 4♦ as game forcing. If I have AKQJx AKQJxx then I'm just going to bid slam once partner picks a suit so partner doesn't have to worry about this hand. He has to worry about hands where game is likely and slam possible if his hand is good enough.

[jdonn]

People often stretch to make this bid in practice. I am more worried that game will go down than that slam will make, though of course I'm bidding game.

 

xx KQJxx AKQxx x is more than most people would need, and rightly so since this hand needs merely an ace and a little support to make game in hearts.

[cherdano]

5♦.

Of course we may play 5♦+2 opposite Ax Axxxx AKxxxx -, but there is no way I can bid more. The long diamonds combined with short hearts may be worth something, but partner already played me for a moderate fit (which I more than have) and a useful card (which I don't), and I don't really know whether the short hearts are worth much.

[Winstonm]

5D. I cannot require partner to have the right hand for more and any other bid I make over-expresses my hand.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

5D.

 

I think it may make sense, to play

4NT and 5C slam tries for hearts /

clubs, at least if 4D carries the

message "We play one of my suits".

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Fluffy]

5♦ as others, might even pass with less.

[kenrexford]

I do not believe that "GF" means "We can make game."

 

It simply means that partner has enough to make that decision for the partnership, hoping that you have something.

 

You do. This is great! Bid 5♦.

 

If you bid 6♦, this might make. But, then you will scare the living daylights out of partner, and he will not use Roman Jumps again, unless he has a freaking monster.

[skjaeran]

Partner very seldom has a game in his own hand even if he bids a FG Roman jump. There's a lot of hands where he's got to stretch, lacking a weaker descriptive bid.

 

So, even if I've got a great fit with regard to suit lenghts, I probably won't add a single trick except for ruffs. Which might be enough for slam once in a while, but probably won't be enough to make game more often.

 

I'll bid a pedestrian 5♦ - as almost everyone else here.

[DrTodd13]

Hi,

 

5D.

 

I think it may make sense, to play

4NT and 5C slam tries for hearts /

clubs, at least if 4D carries the

message "We play one of my suits".

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

What would 4S be? If you were interested in slam what bid would you make over 4♦?

 

I have to admit that I would bid 5♦. My pd did in fact bid 5♦ but was curious as to whether anybody was interested in slam. Here is the dummy you get.

 

x AQxxxx AKTxx A.

 

As I recall, we got a ♣ lead and 13 tricks rolled in.

[jdonn]

Hi,

 

5D.

 

I think it may make sense, to play

4NT and 5C slam tries for hearts /

clubs, at least if 4D carries the

message "We play one of my suits".

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

What would 4S be? If you were interested in slam what bid would you make over 4♦?

 

I have to admit that I would bid 5♦. My pd did in fact bid 5♦ but was curious as to whether anybody was interested in slam. Here is the dummy you get.

 

x AQxxxx AKTxx A.

 

As I recall, we got a ♣ lead and 13 tricks rolled in.

Opener is closer to bidding slam on his own (not that he should) than responder is to inviting it. He has slam on not much worse than a finesse opposite xxxx xx Qxxx xxx. In fact slam has play on perfect breaks opposite xxx xxx xxxx xxx, and he knows partner has fewer than 3 hearts almost for sure, so it will never be this bad.

 

My point is opener has virtually the best hand he can hold to not be bidding slam on his own (if the queen of hearts were the king he would take the plunge for sure), so it's wrong to cater to slam opposite it at the expense of slightly worse hands.