Unusual 5m call after (P)-1H-(1S)-4H-(4S)

[Mbodell]

So IMPs with favorable vulnerability partner opens in second seat 1♥ which is ~10-15, 5+H. Opponent over calls 1♠. I bid 4♥ which is a standard precision ambiguous raise that could be preemptive/could be to make with slam unlikely hand that could be anything in the 0-16 range given partner is a limited opener. LHO passed hand now bids 4♠ and partner now bids 5♦ and it is passed to me. What are reasonable meanings of 5♦?

[kenrexford]

Natural slam move stands out.

[cherdano]

Natural extreme shape stands out.

[neilkaz]

5♦ is likely a few possible things ..

 

1) Fighting for the hand and purposely not doubling or letting you double.

 

2) A slam move

 

3) Giving you more info about what to do over 5♠

 

Why is PD doing this ? Most likely he has lots of shape and at least minimal slam interest if you were bidding to make or have extreme and fitting distribution.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[Codo]

Natural lead directing against 5 Spade stands out.

(Implies extra shape btw too)

[effervesce]

Lead directing primarily, usually extra shape.

[inquiry]

Lead directing primarily, usually extra shape.

Ditto, minus the extra shape stuff... .that is not necessarily promised. If 1♥ had shown a higher maximum than 15, then I think it could be slam try, but hard to imagine even with extreme shape since 4♥ is not "defined".

[marcD]

extreme shape seems clear (does not want to play in 4Sx facing a balanced HCP rich raise, even though pass and pull would not have a special meaning as the pass would not be forcing); warning against doubling 5S with D concentration. Slam is not the issue (or then just blast to slam)

[Finch]

extreme shape

[P_Marlowe]

Natural slam move stands out.

Did I miss a smiley?

 

For whats it worth, for me it would be lead director,

i.e. length or shortage, and the bid would certainly

be based on shape, ... we play hearts.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenrexford]

Since partner is on lead, I don't think that he needs to introduce diamonds to remind himself to lead diamonds, and I doubt that my RHO is about to bid 6♣. Switch Directional, perhaps.

 

However, I would be interested in whether someone can provide an example of a hand with extreme distribution that has no slam interest opposite a partner who might have 16 HCP, one that is appropriate for a 5♦ call.

[655321]

Since partner is on lead...

 

...Switch Directional, perhaps.

Yes, indeed :)

[P_Marlowe]

Since partner is on lead, I don't think that he needs to introduce diamonds to remind himself to lead diamonds, and I doubt that my RHO is about to bid 6♣.  Switch Directional, perhaps.

 

However, I would be interested in whether someone can provide an example of a hand with extreme distribution that has no slam interest opposite a partner who might have 16 HCP, one that is appropriate for a 5♦ call.

I may have gotten the auction wrong, but partner,

who is also the opener did bid 5D, and the overcall

was made by the next player, i.e I would be on lead

against 5S.

 

I checked it before, and I checked it now, but this means

nothing.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kenrexford]

Oh yeah, I missed that 1♠ call.

 

That changes things somewhat. I suppose, then, that there are three options:

 

1. Natural without lead implications. Suggests a possible slam or sacrifice.

2. Natural with strong lead implications. Very mildly suggests a possible slam.

3. Completely artificial lead-director.

 

That said, I absolutely hated when I played it and find it ridiculous to this day to have Responder bid 4♥ with "0-16." This creates the ambiguity as to Opener's action, IMO, because the partnership has not established expectancy parameters in any meaningful way.

[csdenmark]

What are reasonable meanings of 5♦?

MAXIMUM and ♦=void

[Finch]

I don't really see how you can play this solely as a lead-director. You are voluntarily going to the 5-level on a (HCP-)limited hand opposite a partner who might have a penalty double of 4S or alternatively who might have a 0-count with 4 trumps... you have to have a lot of extra something to be bidding at all in front of partner.

 

As for what it is you have a lot of, that's a matter of partnership agreement; you can agree that

 

i) 5D doesn't ask partner to make a decision over 5S based on his diamond holding, just to lead a diamond against it; we might have diamond length, or we might have a diamond void and a lot of extra hearts or even a lot of rounded suit cards

 

or

 

ii) 5D shows a lot of hearts and diamonds and asks partner to look at his hand, whether or not next hand bids 5S.

 

I strongly prefer (ii) as it's more likely that we might want to bid to the 6-level (either to make or as a save) than it is that we are prepared to go to exactly the 5-level but have no interest in partner's hand.

 

As for whether it's a slam try or not, to me the quesion is irrelevant (in the same way that some of the discussions about whether bids are forcing or not is irrelevant): if we have enough shape to bid at the 5-level in front of partner, then opposite the right hand we will have slam on. That's not the same as saying it's a 'slam try'. I once was +1770 on this sort of auction on a combined 19-count.

[helene_t]

I would think of something like

 

-

KQxxxx

Kx

AQxxx

 

or maybe an example without a club control is better:

-

AJxxxx

xx

AKQxx

[kenrexford]

I would think of something like

 

-

KQxxxx

Kx

AQxxx

 

or maybe an example without a club control is better:

-

AJxxxx

xx

AKQxx

Boy! Talk about timid! If you don't think that AKQxx is a club control, you are quite pessimistic! :P

[Mbodell]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=s76hkj742dktcakt2]133|100|Scoring: IMP

- P 1♥ 1♠

4♥ 4♠ 5♦ P

??? [/hv]

 

So my hand in this auction (the 4♥ bidder and now wondering what to do over partner's 5♦ call) was very heavy for my action.

 

My thinking was partner upgrades many very shapely hands to 1♣ so initially I was thinking slam was unlikely, and if it was there it wasn't clear the other table would find it (also we'd just been stripped of our good relay methods because apparently the top bracket of 8 in a sectional swiss is still GCC!). And I didn't want to give the opponents a chance to find a good sac against our game and that I was planning to bid 5♥ over 4♠ if they bid it and hoped we'd be left alone in either 4♥ or 5♥.

 

Now I was picturing partner with 55 in the reds, maybe both red A, maybe a spade void and thinking slam was clear if partner was showing slam try and/or extreme shape. If partner was merely lead directing or giving info for what to do over 5♠ then it is a little less clear.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Mbodell

[cherdano]

The hand you give has only 12 cards.

[kenrexford]

This is too sick for words. But, strangely I have some anyway. :P

 

What?!?!?

 

Your approach allows you to make a leap to 4♥ with that hand, and you wonder about the nuances of what to do after a 5♦ call? Are you serious? The description you gave as to the call of 4♥ is about the most ridiculous I have ever heard for a person playing something non-standard and presumably thought out and intentional. The only person I could imagine agreeing with your actual call is Bubba Jones, the 99-year-old fart who plays with the shortest straw each week. You have five-card support to the King, and Jack for that matter, nearly solidifying the suit. You have the King of diamonds, DOUBLETON for Christ's sake! And you have AKxx in clubs? What?!?! You need about 8 HCP from partner to lay down slam, something like ♠x ♥Axxxx ♦Axxxx ♣xx would do. So whay the heck bid 4♥ with that hand.

 

The scary part is that you are in doubt now about what to do after a 5♦ call. Partner is missing the two red Kings and the club Ace-King, but he commits to the 5-level? If partner has a sick hand that should never be opened, and then makes an implausibly insane 5♦ call, you likely will just make a small slam. If forced to guess, I'd take the push to the seven-level. Given room, I think I'll try a more mundane 6♣.

[jdonn]

I agree with 6♣ now. Really this was too good for 4♥ though, slam chances were too good. Remove a couple hearts from the hand and it's a more classic precision style 4♥ bid.

[Mbodell]

Well I agree my hand is too strong for the 4♥ bid (if I was playing full methods I certainly would have started relaying, without the relay I gave up on slam too quickly), I was overly concerned about preventing a possible good sac against our game when there was a lot of distribution to go around. I jumped to 6♥, not 6♣ (which I agree would be better), but unfortunately partner had x Qxxxx AQxxxx x and opponents started with the A♠ for down 1.

 

So ignoring the bad bidding on the actual hand, I was curious how people would take the 5♦ bid as mild slam try/natural (how I read it) or as lead directing/information giving for a decision over 5♠ (how my partner meant it).

[han]

I recommend not playing in sectionals anymore, sounds like you really need your relays.

[Mbodell]

I recommend not playing in sectionals anymore, sounds like you really need your relays.

It is true, the evidence of this bad judgment position I took on one hand means we were lost without relays. :P

 

Of course that presumes that I'm never lost with relays and I have many other hands that can demonstrate that I'm fully capable of making bad judgments in relay and, for that matter, in standard or 2/1 so I equally shouldn't play anywhere else either.