Well Now!

[kenrexford]

An interesting deal from the Tuesday Blue Pairs:

 

[hv=d=s&n=sj8xxhqxxxxdaxcxx&s=saq9xxhakxxxdqxca]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

In practice, I opened 1♠ and partner raised to 2♠. Because of agreements I had with this partner and a prediction of likely auctions, my next call was 3♣, ostensibly real but possibly a slam cue. Partner bid 3♦, agreed as a cue. I rebid 3♥, a cue. Partner now bid 4♥, which is natural. 6♥ yields the money, as the diamond King is behind the Ace and the spade finesse fails. An interesting and unexpected layout.

 

I liked our (admittedly bizarre) sequence. I then thought of the sequence I would have with preferred methods.

 

1♠

2♠

3♥ (GT or ST)

4♥ (five-card heart support with two covers)

 

At this point, I need to know about the diamond situation. But, I have run out of space. Strangely, my call might be RKCB, planning to bid the slam if partner does not have the spade King, in 6♥, but to sign off if he does. Weird.

 

One of the four other pairs got to 6♥ with these cards. I was impressed.

[Guest Jlall]

I would have bid 1S 2S 4S or maybe psyched a 3D game try (mixed strategy?!)

[kenrexford]

I would have bid 1S 2S 4S or maybe psyched a 3D game try (mixed strategy?!)

Actually, it was close for me. To be completely honest (LOL), that's why I made the "force of necessity" 3♣ cue. It sounded like a real suit if partner bid anything but 3♦, and that would likely screw them up.

 

Of course, had partner cue'd 3♥ after 3♣, I would of course show my diamond control (4♦), LOL!