FIve club jump by partner, undiscussed.

[inquiry]

I started bo put impossible since you have no agreement, so it risk misunderstanding, but I decided not too. Assume your partner is an expert and that he has a reasonable expectation that you are not bad yourself and you will get this bid right.

[pbleighton]

Preemptive bid, weak hands, bunches of clubs.

 

Peter

[bid_em_up]

Assume your partner is an expert and that he has a reasonable expectation that you are not bad yourself and you will get this bid right.

Then it should be exclusion.

[mike777]

Preemptive bid, weak hands, bunches of clubs.

 

Peter

ditto.

[hrothgar]

Exclusion

[pclayton]

Ben, I think the title of the poll is a little misleading. What does playing Jacoby 2N have to do with it? When I first read the title, I thought the jump to 5♣ was in a jacoby auction, not directly over 5♣.

 

If its a direct jump, then hand is just a slew of clubs.

[Guest Jlall]

natural.

[inquiry]

Ben, I think the title of the poll is a little misleading. What does playing Jacoby 2N have to do with it? When I first read the title, I thought the jump to 5♣ was in a jacoby auction, not directly over 5♣.

 

If its a direct jump, then hand is just a slew of clubs.

Well the actual partnership agreement was "2/1, jacoby 2NT, udca"... so that was the limit of your agreement.

[sathyab]

If you start with a 4c splinter and bid 5c over partner's rebid it'd be exclusion as you would not normally be cue-bidding above game level. If pd trots out 4nt you're happy to show your void, as partner is prepared for it.

 

So 5c should be natural.

[jdonn]

If a bid with no agreement can be natural, it is natural, period. Anyone who thinks 5♣ is not something with a ton of clubs is, with all due respect, friggin insane.

 

I want to note the partnership didn't even agree to play exclusion blackwood period! Let alone as a player's first bid and without agreeing a suit first.

[cherdano]

If a bid with no agreement can be natural, it is natural, period. Anyone who thinks 5♣ is not something with a ton of clubs is, with all due respect, friggin insane.

 

I want to note the partnership didn't even agree to play exclusion blackwood period! Let alone as a player's first bid and without agreeing a suit first.

Maybe it is preemptive, but your reasoning is ridiculous. 1S-4C is also possibly natural, and I am sure this partnership has not agreed to play splinters. And still noone would take it as natural.

[Guest Jlall]

Maybe it is preemptive, but your reasoning is ridiculous. 1S-4C is also possibly natural, and I am sure this partnership has not agreed to play splinters. And still noone would take it as natural.

1S-4C is not a jump to game. It is also so widely played as a splinter that it cannot be misconstrued as natural. I WOULD take 1S-4H as natural if bid undiscussed.

[jdonn]

If a bid with no agreement can be natural, it is natural, period. Anyone who thinks 5♣ is not something with a ton of clubs is, with all due respect, friggin insane.

 

I want to note the partnership didn't even agree to play exclusion blackwood period! Let alone as a player's first bid and without agreeing a suit first.

Maybe it is preemptive, but your reasoning is ridiculous. 1S-4C is also possibly natural, and I am sure this partnership has not agreed to play splinters. And still noone would take it as natural.

It is your completely literal interpretation when you know exactly what I meant that is ridiculous. Do you think I was also claiming 1NT p 2♣ is natural because they didn't agree stayman?

 

If you want to be ridiculous and pick apart what people say, I could easily point this out

1S-4C is also possibly natural

  noone would take it as natural.

How could something no one would take as natural possibly be natural? Or did you think my argument pertained to the laws of psychics, in which case you got me. Allow me to clarify so that doesn't happen again. By "can be natural" I mean "a non-negligible amount of players in the class of that given in the problem would interpret this bid as natural." I'm sure you will find a way that is technically wrong as well.

[Gerben42]

I wanted to vote Super-Gerben :ph34r:

 

It's preemptive. Exclusion has to go through 2NT.

[gwnn]

Has to be natural. A hand that would have opened 5♣ (the lower end of the scale).

[Finch]

Maybe it is preemptive, but your reasoning is ridiculous. 1S-4C is also possibly natural, and I am sure this partnership has not agreed to play splinters. And still noone would take it as natural.

1S-4C is not a jump to game. It is also so widely played as a splinter that it cannot be misconstrued as natural. I WOULD take 1S-4H as natural if bid undiscussed.

Blindingly obviously natural, weakish hand, loads and loads of clubs, not inviting me to raise unless I have a very special (control-rich) hand.

 

I wouldn't try 1S - 4H undiscussed.

This one is so obviously to play that I would.

[Fluffy]

One question for all like me who would take it as natural: would you alert the call if you had 5 clubs?

 

I bid 1♠-4♥ as a passed hand once, and partner didn't alert the bid. He had ♥AQJ109x himself. Director adjusted the score after a horrible lead (but in Spain you don't expect much from directors).

[whereagles]

When pard bids something not agreed, it should be taken as natural. But I'd first look at my hand to check whether that's likely. E.g. if I have, say,

 

Kxxxx

Ax

x

AQJxx

 

it can hardly be natural, right? :ph34r: In that case I'd take it as some sort of voidwood, I guess.

[P_Marlowe]

Exclusion.

 

If you say, Exclusion goes via 2NT - fair enough,

but then weak with long clubs can also go through

1NT (forcing).

 

Whatever it is, if I get it wrong (sometimes my hand

tells me), it is partners fault.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mike777]

Exclusion sure seems to come up alot more on the Forum hands than I ever noticed in decades of reading bridge magazines and books. :).

[Halo]

Natural. I don't this bid is commonly enough accepted as artificial for my expert partner to take such a risk without agreement.

[inquiry]

I have to admit I am a little surprised by the number of people thinking this was exclusion if undiscussed. My general rule is blackwood (even exlusion) in a hitherto unsupported suit is never a possible interpretation for a bid if a forcing raise was available.

 

I held something like

 

JTxxxx

Qx

KJ

AJx

 

Yes, I know, maybe not even an opening bid. Partner bid 5C, I passed. Yes he had a club void and huge spade fi--six spades makes (lose heart Ace), down five.

[SoTired]

I voted exclusion only because I thought all the answers other than weak hand with oodles of clubs were a joke.

 

I just thot of this new rule for crazy auctions like this: If you want to do something weird, is there a non-weird way of doing it?

 

void splinter? 4C is still sprinter. void is bonus.

ERKC? You did not even discuss ERKC, but you might start that with 4C or 2N

Fit Jump? Who fit jumps to the 5-level?

Super Gerber? Give me a break. 4N is regular blackwood, so you don't need Super Gerber

 

My story: I was dealt 8 hearts to the J and out. My partner opened a natural 1C and the next player passed. I jumped to 4H. Pard thought and thought and finally bid 6H, which was doubled and down 2. Partner had a balanced 18/19 HCP with ♥Kx. If I had wanted to involve pard in the auction, I would start with 1H. 4H was obviously a hand that did not want to bid any slam with any 1C opener. 6H was a bid that assumed I did not know what I was doing.

[skjaeran]

Non-discussed: Natural preemp

Discussed: Ditto :)

 

Exclusion is bid via 2NT (or some other forcing raise).

[skjaeran]

This topic reminds me of a funny story.

 

Hans-Olof Hallén (swedish int. TD) played in a pairs tournament a long time ago with a new partner. They had agreed on methods to some extent, but some areas were uncovered. Then this novel sequence came up: 1♠ (Hallén) - 4♥ (new partner). Of course that wasn't discussed. Halleén didn't have a clue from their agreements. So, looking down at his own void, he decided partner probably had some hearts, and passed. Playing in the 0-0 fit didn't do them any good - except for a hilarious story. :)