tough decision

[Fluffy]

♠AJ1095

♥AQ10962

♦J

♣3

 

 

1♣-1♥

3NT-??

[helene_t]

4♠, hoping it shows this forward-going but non-forcing hand (sorry, Charles :) ), p might interpret it differently ....

[mike777]

6clubs

 

 

 

edit: oops I guess that was not a poll choice.

[pclayton]

I'm OK with 4♠ (uh, forcing) or even 4♣.

[whereagles]

What's 3NT? If gambling style, I'll try 4♣, hoping to pop a 4M bid from pard, after which I'd bid 7♣. If he bids 4♦ instead, I'll settle for 6♣.

 

If not gambling, I'd try 4♠ and hope this is forcing.

[jdonn]

I'll try 4♠, not really knowing or caring yet whether it's forcing or how partner will interpret. It's hard to see how it could work out terribly.

[Apollo81]

I'll try 4♠, not really knowing or caring yet whether it's forcing or how partner will interpret. It's hard to see how it could work out terribly.

Exactly.

[mikeh]

I'll try 4♠, not really knowing or caring yet whether it's forcing or how partner will interpret. It's hard to see how it could work out terribly.

Well, if partner thinks it is non-forcing and that 3♣ described his hand (and I know that not all agree that it shows a solid club suit with pointed suit stoppers), he may pass when we are cold for slam. Maybe he shouldn't, but 'not caring' seems a little blase (sorry, I can't put the accent on the e in blase).

 

But I bid 4♠ as well: it must logically be unpassable (and thus forcing :P ). I am not trying to improve the contract if 3N has the meaning I think it has.

 

If I were worried that partner might pass, I'd bid 4♣ to make sure that we didn't reach 6♣ off two aces.

 

Edit: I didn't really mean 'off two aces'.. no way are we missing the club Ace, but we may have grand and we may not make small (altho I'd bet we would opposite my 3N bids), so I'd go slow on general principles if I thought he'd pass 4♠

[keylime]

4♠ here too - I got a lotta hand for pard.

[Guest Jlall]

I'd probably just go 6C with a client and start with 4C with a regular partner. I would interpret 4S as a cue for clubs looking for a D control (though why not bid 4C with that?) based on meta agreements, though that is not optimal here

[ArtK78]

4♠.

 

If partner has 8 solid clubs and a side card, we have either 11 or 12 tricks depending on what the side card is. Let's clue partner in on what we have.

 

Jumping to 6♣ is too unilateral. There are aspects of partner's hand that only he knows - the distribution and high cards in the side suits. He is in a better position to make the final decision on the hand.

[Echognome]

I'm going to go with 6♣. This is assuming of course that 3NT is a solid club suit with short ♥. I don't want to paint the picture any better for opponents and have them find, say, a killing trump lead. Perhaps on a diamond lead, partner is able to trump his losing diamond before the opponents can lead trumps (with, e.g. Kx x Axx AKQJxxx). So let's roll out the slam and let the opponents work out what to lead.

[beatrix45]

:unsure: 6♣. 3NT should be running clubs and two or three other cards. Either major suit king is enough to give us a good play for six ♣- seven clubs and six hearts or seven clubs along with ♠ AK and ruff and back to the ♥ A. Another possibility is seven clubs plus ♦ AK and ruff plus major suit aces. ♥ or even a ♠ finesse might be there. No point in being cute in the bidding, I sure don't want to draw a trump lead.

[Raivis]

6NT.

Possible opener hand - Kx/xx/AKQx/AKQxx.

6NT prevent from possible major ruff in another major contract at level 6.

[Fluffy]

for the many 4♠ bidders, partner bids an unimaginative 5♣ after that.

[hotShot]

Possible opener hand - Kx/xx/AKQx/AKQxx.

If you open this 1♣ you have a ( game? ) forcing reverse 2♦. There is no need to jump to 3NT.

 

Isn't it std to open this 1♦ because you have 4 of them?

 

I've seen a lot of 2♣ bids with this shape and strength.

I don't think this is a possible hand.

[mikeh]

Possible opener hand - Kx/xx/AKQx/AKQxx.

If you open this 1♣ you have a ( game? ) forcing reverse 2♦. There is no need to jump to 3NT.

 

Isn't it std to open this 1♦ because you have 4 of them?

 

I've seen a lot of 2♣ bids with this shape and strength.

I don't think this is a possible hand.

It is certainly not standard to open this kind of hand (or any hand with reverse values) in the shorter suit. There are the two schools of thought re the correct opening with a generic normal opening hand with 4=5 in the minors. While traditionally this was a 1♦ opener, and still is for many players, there is a substantial school that opens 1♣ unless the suit disparity is truly great (AKQx Jxxxx as an example). But no-one opens 1♦ with reverse values, since to do so means distorting your hand (do you jumpshift into 3♣ next?) while opening 1♣ allows an easy descriptive sequence.

 

But I agree that no good player would hold the given hand for 1♣ then 3N.

[Fluffy]

:P 6♣. 3NT should be running clubs and two or three other cards. Either major suit king is enough to give us a good play for six ♣- seven clubs and six hearts or seven clubs along with ♠ AK and ruff and back to the ♥ A. Another possibility is seven clubs plus ♦ AK and ruff plus major suit aces. ♥ or even a ♠ finesse might be there. No point in being cute in the bidding, I sure don't want to draw a trump lead.

Perfect reading!

 

Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx

 

We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)

[Raivis]

:P 6♣.  3NT should be running clubs and two or three other cards.  Either major suit king is enough to give us a good play for six ♣- seven clubs and six hearts or seven clubs along with ♠ AK and ruff and back to the ♥ A.  Another possibility is seven clubs plus ♦ AK and ruff plus major suit aces.  ♥ or even a ♠ finesse might be there.  No point in being cute in the bidding, I sure don't want to draw a trump lead.

Perfect reading!

 

Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx

 

We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)

One comment - unbelieveable 3NT bid!

[mikeh]

:P 6♣.  3NT should be running clubs and two or three other cards.  Either major suit king is enough to give us a good play for six ♣- seven clubs and six hearts or seven clubs along with ♠ AK and ruff and back to the ♥ A.  Another possibility is seven clubs plus ♦ AK and ruff plus major suit aces.  ♥ or even a ♠ finesse might be there.  No point in being cute in the bidding, I sure don't want to draw a trump lead.

Perfect reading!

 

Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx

 

We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)

So what was the point of this post? To show that your partner is either an idiot or simply profoundly ignorant?

[Free]

B) 6♣.  3NT should be running clubs and two or three other cards.  Either major suit king is enough to give us a good play for six ♣- seven clubs and six hearts or seven clubs along with ♠ AK and ruff and back to the ♥ A.  Another possibility is seven clubs plus ♦ AK and ruff plus major suit aces.  ♥ or even a ♠ finesse might be there.  No point in being cute in the bidding, I sure don't want to draw a trump lead.

Perfect reading!

 

Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx

 

We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)

So what was the point of this post? To show that your partner is either an idiot or simply profoundly ignorant?

:P Fluff passed, he was the idiot :) :P

[Fluffy]

:( 6♣.  3NT should be running clubs and two or three other cards.  Either major suit king is enough to give us a good play for six ♣- seven clubs and six hearts or seven clubs along with ♠ AK and ruff and back to the ♥ A.  Another possibility is seven clubs plus ♦ AK and ruff plus major suit aces.  ♥ or even a ♠ finesse might be there.  No point in being cute in the bidding, I sure don't want to draw a trump lead.

Perfect reading!

 

Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx

 

We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)

So what was the point of this post? To show that your partner is either an idiot or simply profoundly ignorant?

 

The whole point was to share a IMO difficult problem with people and find out if passing 3NT was a popular alternative or not.

 

And what was the point of your last post?

[helene_t]

Now that I originally stated that I hoped my 4♠ bid was non-forcing, it would be consistent to pass 5♣.

 

But p can't have anything less than Kx-xx-Kx-AKQxxxx so I suppose we should at least bid 6♣, maybe even make a grand try. So the conclusion is that if 4♠ was non-forcing I should have bid 4♣.

[dailo]

how about 5♠?

I think 5♠ should be slam forcing, and let partner choose.

[bhall]

4N

 

If partner has stretched to bid 3N, we are still OK. If he has the classic hand (♠Kx ♥x ♦Axx ♣AKQ10xxx), we rate to take 12 tricks in ♣, and with all primes he should cue 5♦. But in my experience, partner NEVER has the classic hand.