is this blatantly obvious?

[gwnn]

Jxxx

Kxxx

xx

KJx

 

Pard opens unfavorable 1st seat 4♣, RHO doubles. Opps are the best pair of the field.

 

edit: yes MP. ugh...

[Gerben42]

No, don't see the point. Also no raise if opps bid 4M now.

[bhall]

If partner typically opens 4♣ unfavorable on 8 ♣ and 7 tricks, pass is right. If his bid shows one more trick, 5♣ looks right, because we rate to fail by only one trick, while the opps should make 10 or 11 tricks. But pass could still be the winning action.

[pclayton]

Pass.

 

No aces and no singletons for pard. Even opposite a sound 4♣ opening, 500 or even 800 just looks too likely.

[Winstonm]

As you mention "best pair in the field", I assume it is matchpoints. I am not moving red vs white at matchpoints, as I must either be perfect, meaning down -1 against their game, or I must be sacrificing against a slam. Typically, at matchpoints, unless the slam is totally obvious I will get a poor result no matter what I do, so what is the point of going off -500 or -800 if no other pairs are even going past game?

 

This is a more interesting IMP decision - at IMP scoring I would surely bid 5C, as -500 versus -420 is not that significant, but -500 against -920 is a big pickup.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

yes, I have 2 tricks for partner, enough to raise

the bar by one trick, I assume unfav. means red

vs. green, in which case partner promised to go

at most -2.

 

He may even have a chance of making.

 

But to answer your question, pass could be right,

given the holding in the mayor suit, and because

partner may have some defence out side clubs,

afterall I hold KJ in his suit.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

I'd bid 5. Opps are favorites for having a slam, and since they're the top pair, they might very well bid it. Let's make it a bit harder for them.

[rogerclee]

This is actually a somewhat interesting point. In general, not on this problem, does 5C actually make it harder for the opponents to find their slam if one is available?

 

I think 4-level minor preempts in general are fairly awkward to bid over if it goes 4C-X-P-? to you and you have some cards and a major. A lot of opponents will simply sign off in 4M since they are unsure about the 5-level.

 

However, giving them an option to bid 5M over 5C does two things:

 

a. It allows them to explain their hand as having extras and that 5M is a reasonably good contract opposite an average takeout double.

 

b. It allows them to evaluate their club shortness very well.

 

I don't know the answer to this question, but it seems fairly often that my side's preempts convince the other side to make very good decisions.

[whereagles]

it seems fairly often that my side's preempts convince the other side to make very good decisions.

doh!.. maybe that's because you always have your bid? :)

[miguelm]

I prefer to play with partners who usually have their bids :)

 

Having said that, I expect partner to have 8 playing tricks here (unfavorable vulnerability). In MPs, I am prepared to bid 5C.

This has several goals in mind.

First one is to increase partner's noise.... I can't figure out how we will beat a Major game and I also know we won't be ruined in 5C.

Second, 5C is more likely to make their job harder to find slam, at least in theory :)

Third, this shows a lot of partnership trust, and I am willing to get a bottom (if that is the case) to show it.

[ArtK78]

Raise. If they are going to guess what to do, make them guess at the 5 level.

[Guest Jlall]

Easy pass for me, the preempt has probably done it's job already. Maybe they had to double off-shape or something, and you just hand partner's good work back if you raise since they can double you and take their number, which is less than the slam they may have had but that they probably weren't bidding if we passed. Besides they often pass out 4♣ here with nothing in clubs, you would be surprised, so why kill that chance?

[Richardrls]

There is really no way to give a clear, intelligent answer to the question, until you tell the readers what the nature of the partnership's four level preempts are all about. Assuming that the four level bid is simply a preemptive bid, such continuation of the preempt with this hand with adverse vulnerability looks like plain suicide to me.

[the hog]

Pass. Poor hand and no ruffing value. Maybe they will stop in 4M.

[beatrix45]

:blink: 5♣. I think I must bid a bunch of something, probably now as opposed to later. For once, I have to go almost 100% with the 'old guard' and against the 'young guns' - at least given the paucity of analysis from the new generations' replies.

 

This deal strikes me as almost a tactical problem because the vulnerability plus my hand and the opponents' relative strength constrains partner's hand to something like AQ eighth with a side three bagger or AQ seventh with a side four or five bagger.

[gwnn]

Pard had some semi-random 2038 with nothing or close to nothing with AQT9... in trumps. I raised but the -500 was not very good vs. all the 4♥+2's.... I hope I can pass next time.