MP dilemma under pressure

[whereagles]

MPs, V vs NV, you hold:

 

♠ x

♥ Kxxxx

♦ KJT9x

♣ AX

 

You LHO pard RHO

1♥ . 1♠ .. dbl . 4♠

??

 

No special agreements here. Your bid?

 

By the way, a good agreement here is

4NT + 5♦ = shapely hand, but min

straight 5♦ = shapely hand, extras

[inquiry]

I want to play precisely 5♦, so using you agreement that 4NT followed by a pull to 5♦ shows this type of hand, that is what I would bid. Without that treatment (i play the 4NT pull as showing the better hand), I would simply bid 5♦.

 

We might not make it, but I did a short reality check using ZAR points, which also suggest going on. We have 11 hcp, 4 control pts, 14 distirbuton points. PArtner will have 0 to 2 ♥, 4+♦ and 4+♣, so we are looking at a super fit with at least 5 and probably 6+ misfit points. And partners double showed around 22 ZAR points. 22+39+5= 65 which is more than needed for slam (which is 62), but I find it hard to beleive partner will have two aces required and we don't have two heart losers or a heart loser plus an ace loser. So 5 is enough for me. I may regret not bidding more if partner is:

 

xx Ax A8xxx Kxxx

 

but we can't play him for the perfect hand at this level.

[ArcLight]

This is MP, are we likely to make 5♦? Or is it less than 50%?

 

Will teh field be in 4♠?

 

I'd double. I don't think 4♠ is making.

[han]

Agree with Ben.

 

edit: not that it matters much, but I'd play it the other way around (4NT then 5D being stronger). Feels more natural to me but that's subjective.

[jdonn]

I did a short reality check using ZAR points

There have been so many good quotes for my profiles on AIM and BBO lately, it's getting hard for me to choose just one...

[han]

Especially that the best quote is already taken..

[Apollo81]

5♦ assuming no special agreements

[Foxx]

So 5 is enough for me. I may regret not bidding more if partner is:

 

xx Ax A8xxx Kxxx

 

but we can't play him for the perfect hand at this level.

Yeah. Partner might not put down the ♦8 in dummy for you. What are you going to do then? Oh nooooooo.............

[Fluffy]

I will be the first one to just pass.

[Guest Jlall]

I will be the first one to just pass.

I'll be the second.

[mike777]

Pass. I assume this shows a minimum hand, which is what I got.

[jdeegan]

:P 5♦ looks to me like the best shot. Give partner a seven point min like:

 

xxx

Qx

Qxxx

Kxxx

 

and we are down one versus their 4♠ probable make-stiff ♦ and no club lead - were you expecting a club lead? One extra trick, and we make the vul game. Of course, we could get killed when 4♠ and 5♦ both go down, but I expect pard to be at least 4-4 in the minors even for a one level neg dbl over 1♥-1♠-dbl - is this a reasonable assumption?

[pclayton]

Not sure I like 4N to be able to split the 5♦ calls. If pard is reading you for secondary clubs, he may bury you with 4♥ + 6♣ over 5♠.

 

5♦, but ready to apologize if its 500 or we are beating 4♠.

[whereagles]

Well actually hands were

 

Ax

AT98

Qx

K98xx

 

x

Kxxxx

KJT9x

Ax

 

You LHO pard RHO

1♥ . 1♠ .. dbl . 4♠

5♦ . 5♠ .. ??

 

and pard ended up bidding 6♥ for 1 down dbled (RHO had ♥QJxx). Yeah, yeah, pd had nothing close to a dbl... lol.

 

How would you have bid the N/S hands had it gone

 

You LHO pard RHO

1♥ . 1♠ . 2NT . 4♠

..??

 

2NT = offensive 4-card raise, inv+

[mgoetze]

and pard ended up bidding 6♥ for 1 down dbled (RHO had ♥QJxx). Yeah, yeah, pd had nothing close to a dbl... lol.

Smack him on the head with a copy of "Partnership Bidding at Bridge". :(

[Fluffy]

How would you have bid the N/S hands had it gone

 

You LHO pard RHO

1♥ . 1♠ . 2NT . 4♠

..??

 

2NT = offensive 4-card raise, inv+

Even if we had a fancy convention such as 4NT wich shows a high ODR hand with minimum values I would not want to give that much information tomy opponents, I'd bid 5 because I like having no ♥Q nor J.

[han]

Don't let mgoetze fool you, this is not a system fault. Partner should just make the normal raise, in standard bidding that's 2S.

[mgoetze]

Don't let mgoetze fool you, this is not a system fault.

Who said it was? The book mentions things such as showing your support immediately and making your partner boss of the auction... while it does suggest some systematic treatments, that's not the relevant thing here.

 

I suggest you read it. ;)

[whereagles]

actually, the book has 2 bids for this situation

 

2NT = offensive raise, usually 4+ cards

2♠ = defensive raise, usually 3 cards

 

This hand fits the 2NT bill better.

[foo]

actually, the book has 2 bids for this situation

 

2NT = offensive raise, usually 4+ cards

2♠ = defensive raise, usually 3 cards

 

This hand fits the 2NT bill better.

♠Ax♥AT98♦Qx♣K98xx

 

1♥-(1♠)-??

 

I have an opening bid with 4card support for Opener's presumably 5cM. Why am I doing anything other forcing to game on this hand?

 

?IF? the call is legal in your playing area, 2N is the call in _PBaB_

 

OTOH, in ACBL-land an artificial 2N call to show a raise here is not legal and you must use 2S= LR+

 

Actually, when I can play both calls, I prefer to switch the meanings from those in the book.

[han]

I suggest you read it. :)

<raises his hands to the sky with a hopeless expression on his face>

[Free]

Why try to fix an auction when there was a clear error on the previous round? You'll mess up the situation when he does have his bid!

 

Just teach your p to show support with support... :)

[Foxx]

A little unlucky. Your slam wasn't hopeless; you needed hearts 2-2 (yeah right) or a singleton honor in either hand, with you starting 'em the right way. Oh yeah, they have to not have a diamond ruff either.

 

Take away the ♥10 and/or ♥9 and North's bidding is worthy of the "paperback-to-the-head" treatment. :)