Battling Preempts-2

[han]

I voted for 5D.

[ochinko]

5♦, I don't think inviting makes much sense.  Partner is going to downgrade cause his diamonds suck, and it;s right to be in game opposite some non doubles, like A10x Axxx xxx Axx

I don't get this. Don't you trust you partner will raise 4♦ to 5 with three Aces in hand?

 

What I would like to avoid in the unlikely case when partner has three Aces is to be raised from 5♦ to 6.

[skjaeran]

5♦, I don't think inviting makes much sense.  Partner is going to downgrade cause his diamonds suck, and it;s right to be in game opposite some non doubles, like A10x Axxx xxx Axx

I don't get this. Don't you trust you partner will raise 4♦ to 5 with three Aces in hand?

 

What I would like to avoid in the unlikely case when partner has three Aces is to be raised from 5♦ to 6.

Huh? Partner haven't forgotten that you passed over 3♣. He won't raise you to 6♦ unless having something seriously good. 3 aces won't be enough.. I'm somewhere between 4 and 5♦'s. I'd probably just hog the hand and bid 5♦ at the table.

[han]

I don't think partner would raise 4D to 5 with the hand that apollo gave.

[whereagles]

me neither, but 4♦ still seems quite enough :/

[Al_U_Card]

Hi,

 

it is 4D vs. 5D, 4D gives partner the chance to

show his 6 card mayor, and it gives him the

chance to check out, the downside, we may

make 4D+1.

 

And yes, I agree with pass the first time.

 

No question about that.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

I concur as this sequence shows the hand I happen to hold......doh!

[jdonn]

5♦ is a gigantic overbid, partner never has the perfect takeout double people want him to have, especially when balancing! 4♦ is plenty. You start bidding 5♦ on these hands and partner stops being able to double ever.

[Free]

Agree with Josh here, 5♦ is waaaay too high. I can understand 4♦, and I still like 3♦ :D

[Halo]

I voted for 3D because partner knows I will expect a light double here. 4D seems seems reasonable as well.

[gwnn]

While it's entirely reasonable that 3♦ is the highest making contract for any side, it is undoubtedly improbable. And I really hate to use one bid for both

 

xxxx

Kxx

Kxxx

xx

 

and this hand. I understand we're lacking space for adequate exploration, but this hand HAS TO be good enough for 4♦. And, for every magical minimum hand that partner won't raise on, there are, I fear, 3 others opposite which 5♦ will have ridiculous chances, some of which opps will smack.

 

4♦

[han]

I had the following thought, don't know if this makes sense to you all: The fact that we have a singleton club makes it more likely that partner has some values as he is less likely to have a singleton club himself. Also, partner with xx or xxx in clubs is less likely to raise 4D to 5D when it is right.

[cherdano]

I had the following thought, don't know if this makes sense to you all: The fact that we have a singleton club makes it more likely that partner has some values as he is less likely to have a singleton club himself. Also, partner with xx or xxx in clubs is less likely to raise 4D to 5D when it is right.

The first one seems right, I am not sure about the second one. I think ♣xxx is a good holding once partner jumps, ♣xx isn't.