Your decision?

[cnszsun]

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sak10xhdaqj98c10xxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

1♦-1♥

1♠-2♣* (gf)

3♣-3♦

3♠-3NT

?[/hv]

Do you agree with my bids up to now, anyway, would you pass 3nt?

 

Sry, pls move this to 'sayc and 2/1 discussion'.

Edited November 22, 2007 by cnszsun

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

yes, the bidding is fine, and now I would pass.

 

You have told partner, that you hold

a 4054 hand, and that you hold a top

honor in spade.

And looking at your hand, I believe, the

above describes your hand pretty well.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mike777]

1) Agree with bidding so far

2) 4D now.

[Codo]

I really thought that this is an auto-pass.

I showed at least a 4153, with really nothing helpful in hearts. So even thinking about pulling is wrong. IF 3 NT is wrong, pd bid wrong. I showed my hand closely enough for him to make a good guess.

[helene_t]

I could have had less. I think bidding 4♦ is reasonable. P shows a slam invite but I don't know have serious that invite is. Good problem.

[Hanoi5]

I'd bid 4♦, I think partner could have signed-off at 3NT previously, 3♦ after the 4th suit suggests slam.

[joker_gib]

Pass, description done and partner concludes in 3NT

[inquiry]

On the plus side, partner has made a game-forcing raise of diamonds and you have a great hand for diamonds. On the down side, partner has not bid clubs to show clubs, and your club suit is not real good for 3NT. The question is what is the understanding about the 3♠ bid. All suits bid, is this a slam try? Could it be an attempt to get to 3NT with concerns about the third suit you bid?

 

If partner has S-Qx H-AKJxx D-Kxxx C-xx you might lose first five club tricks. But would partner not rebid 3NT instead of 3D over 3C with that hand? If one assumes that after 3♣ that 3♦ expressed at least some slam ambition, how can you now pass 3NT?

 

So all the 5332 and most of the 5422 hands disappear after 3♦. Partner rates to be short in one of the black suits. If it is clubs, surely a slam exist, if it is spades, slam and game depends upon the quality of partners clubs. I would bid 4♦, denying a club control (Ace or king), the rest is up to partner. If he cooperates, by not signing off in, we bid slam.

 

BTW, after 4♦, how do you play a 4NT bid by partner? Blackwood or natural signoff?

[jdonn]

Bidding here is telling partner he doesn't know what he is doing. We not only showed our shape, we even emphasized the good spades. 3NT is not a suggestion, partner knows we are short in hearts already. His bidding suggests a spade weakness for notrump. If he had a club weakness he would not bid 3NT here, and if we bid 3NT over 3♦ he should pull with spade weakness.

[helene_t]

BTW, after 4♦, how do you play a 4NT bid by partner? Blackwood or natural signoff?

A sign-off does not make much sense here, then he should have bid 3N over 3♣.

[mike777]

BTW, after 4♦, how do you play a 4NT bid by partner? Blackwood or natural signoff?

A sign-off does not make much sense here, then he should have bid 3N over 3♣.

I play 4nt here is a cue for hearts....

4h is kickback, rkc for D.

 

I agree this is a very hard hand and if you pass 3nt that is fine!

I think 3s is still a grope for 3nt or best game, not a clear slam try.

I choose to bid 4d over 3nt despite the heart void since I have more than partner will expect. Granted 2c here for me shows a really good hand not a random 12 or 13 count

[mikeh]

I think this is a little closer than jdonn suggests, but it is still a pass for me.

 

Partner's sequence suggested interest in a high-level minor suit contract if our hand was appropriate. The fact that he bid 3N after our 3♠ suggests that his interest in diamonds is no longer, if it ever were, strong. Typical hand: x AQxxx Kxxx KJx.

 

Had we held, for example, Axxx x AQJx Axxx, a hand consistent with our auction to date, we'd be bidding on quite happily.

 

It is useful, when evaluating our hand in auctions such as these, to appreciate the extent, if any, to which we have previously limited our values. Partner, when bidding 4SF and then when bidding 3♦, had to cater to a wide range of values: anything up to just below a jump shift or jump reverse over 1♥. Thus his sequence isn't a strong slam move: it might have been, when he bid 3♦, but 3N clarifies his level of interest, and we really don't have anything huge by way of extras... a void in the suit in which he has, probably, his greatest length and in which he definitely has values is a negative slam feature, not a positive one.

[mikeh]

BTW, after 4♦, how do you play a 4NT bid by partner? Blackwood or natural signoff?

A sign-off does not make much sense here, then he should have bid 3N over 3♣.

If my partner bid 3N and then 4N, it is natural. Referring back to my earlier post, partner's sequence to 3N suggests that he has short, weak spades, and a minimum, and my 3♠ bid gave him assurance both that the opps won't/can't run that suit and that I have (for slam purposes) wasted values.

 

Any other approach makes it very tough for partner to move constructively over my 3♣: where my hand was still relatively unlimited: he HAS to show the diamonds when he has them, but thereafter, he HAS to be allowed to slow the auction down: otherwise my pull of 3N isn't merely another, strong slam try, it is in essence a virtual slam force... it certainly commits us to at least 5♦ when we both have length and strength opposite shortness. That, in turn, means that opener has to pass 3N unless he is SURE than 5♦ is at least as safe as 3N and that slam is worth pursuing.

[dicklont]

Call me crazy but I don't understand the commenters above that pass 3NT.

Partner goes through all the trouble of fourt suit forcing

to support my beautiful diamonds

and then he wants to play 3NT all of a sudden?

I think he's is interested in 6♦.

 

My clubs are no good, and the value of my ♥ void is uncertain but still i bid 4♦ to keep the options open.

Unclear how this will proceed though.

[whereagles]

Think pard might have been trying to check whether or not there is spade wastage. Possible hand:

 

x

AKxx

Kxxx

Kxxx

 

If ♠AK were, say ♣AQ, there would be a slam. As it is, pard lost interest and signs-off.

[Guest Jlall]

Do not agree at all with jdonn, for starters 4144 is certainly possible with our auction to date. Secondly, how can 3N be a sign off? Would jdonn pass with a 4054 17 count? I mean seriously, this is not "overruling" partner, he bid 3D for a reason. He could have just bid 3N over 3C.

 

This is a close case but I would bid 4D.

[jdonn]

I agree you can pull 3NT with extras, so maybe I poorly stated in my last post. But we don't have much extra.

 

Edit: Looking back I now remember why I said pulling means you don't trust partner. I wasn't trying to say that you shouldn't bid on to look for slam (in general), I was saying you shouldn't pull out of fear 3NT is going down. That was in response to Inquiry's post that suggested 3NT could go down, he thought partner might have short clubs so I replied that's impossible. But going slamming is a perfectly valid reason to pull if you think you are good enough.

[skjaeran]

Partner has made a light slam try in diamonds. It looks like our 3♠ bid put him off for the moment. But we have extras here IMO. I guess a slam is at worst on a ♣ guess if partner doesn't sign off in 4NT over my 4♦ now. Denying a ♣ control should give partner a nice description of our hand.

[brianshark]

In my opinion, one of the two situations are true:

 

Partner was scrambling for stoppers for a 3NT contract. His 3NT bid suggests he found them. Therefore pass.

 

Partner had a slam try in diamonds. But your 3♠ bid was not what he wanted to hear so instead he decided to sign off in 3NT. My guess is that he has a shortage in spades and soft values in hearts or clubs (KJs and the like). If your spade values were instead in clubs or hearts then he would have pressed on to slam.

 

3NT should (almost) always be a suggestion to play. Mark me down for a pass.

[cnszsun]

My partner's hand is here if you are interested:

♠Jx

♥AKQxx

♦xxxx

♣AK

 

At table, i was thinking of pass or 4D, and finally passed to respect partner's choice. After reading justin's comments, i agree that 4D is a little better because i still have unexposed extras. Anyway, 5D would not be much worse than 3nt.

[whereagles]

Not much worse? 7 is on a finesse. 6 is a must and you can get there if pard realizes 3♠ is GOOD news, not bad. This is because it confirms spade control and no club wastage.

[neilkaz]

Call me crazy but I don't understand the commenters above that pass 3NT.

Partner goes through all the trouble of fourt suit forcing

to support my beautiful diamonds

and then he wants to play 3NT all of a sudden?

I think he's is interested in 6♦.

 

My clubs are no good, and the value of my ♥ void is uncertain but still i bid 4♦ to keep the options open.

Unclear how this will proceed though.

We agree, Dick. PD could have tried to sign off in 3NT over our 3♣ or bid it instead of 2♣ 4sf.

[mikeh]

My partner's hand is here if you are interested:

♠Jx

♥AKQxx

♦xxxx

♣AK

 

At table, i was thinking of pass or 4D, and finally passed to respect partner's choice. After reading justin's comments, i agree that 4D is a little better because i still have unexposed extras. Anyway, 5D would not be much worse than 3nt.

If this were an assign the blame for missing slam, responder gets 90% in my book.

 

While I see what all the 4♦ bidders have said, in my opinion at least half of them simply don't understand what partner's sequence (to 3N) should show. Some, such as Harald and Justin do, and see the decision to move as close and vote to move while I see it as close and vote to pass.

 

But there is no way in the world that I would even consider responder's 3N with that hand of his!

 

I admit that the diamonds could be better, but so what? Partner did not bid 3N over 3♦: he bid 3♠, which he would not have done with, say, AQxx x QJxx QJxx: he'd have bid 3N at the speed of light.

 

It may well be that, when responder cues 4♣ rather than making that silly 3N call, the partnership is committed to slam or 5♦... it may be impossible to stop in 4N.. but I don't see how responder should be so scared of going down in 5♦ that he underbids his hand by an Ace!

 

Wouldn't we all bid 2♣, 3♦ and 3N with, say, x AKxx Kxxx Kxxx?

 

I would hope so.. since partner might hold xxxx void AQJxx AQxx... drive to 3N right away opposite that and then try to brag about your bidding skills :rolleyes: While if he held AQ10x x AQxx Jxxx, you'd like to reach 3N (not that it is great, but what is?).

[mike777]

My partner's hand is here if you are interested:

♠Jx

♥AKQxx

♦xxxx

♣AK

 

At table, i was thinking of pass or 4D, and finally passed to respect partner's choice. After reading justin's comments, i agree that 4D is a little better because i still have unexposed extras. Anyway, 5D would not be much worse than 3nt.

3nt is horrible by responder. 100%

 

I am looking for a grand slam with this hand, not bidding 3nt. :rolleyes:

[ArtK78]

As if this has to be factored in, the scoring is IMPs. So, getting to 5♦ as opposed to 3NT is not an issue (assuming 5♦ makes, which is hardly much of a concern).

 

Responder's 3NT call was extremely wimpy. Opener showed a good hand with real diamonds and real spades. RKCB is in order however you play it. Quite frankly, responder should bid it over 3♣.

 

It is hard to construct a hand for opener that is consistent with the auction that will go down at 5♦ (KQTx -- QJTxx QJTx is a possibility, but it is very remote). I am much more concerned with getting to a good 6♦ or 7♦ than I am in getting too high.