Do you or don't you?

[ArtK78]

I think that passing over 5♥ is fairly clear. And also the 4♥ bid is fairly well defined - offensive strength sufficient to take a shot at game but, since there was no cue bid, not a pure power bid. So the hand should be less than an opening bid but with sufficient distributional strength and a good fit to warrant a game bid.

 

In this context, partner's 5♥ bid is clearly to play. And there is no guarantee that 5♥ will make, or that the opponents are not making 5♣.

[rogerclee]

Are there really two threads of detailed discussion about this decision?

 

Passsssssssssssssssssss.

[mikeh]

I am late to the party, but this is an easy pass for me.

 

I do not mean, by saying that it is easy, that I think that we have little hope of making slam. I would not be the least bit surprised to take 12 tricks.. nor would I be surprised to be held to 11.. I would be somewhat surprised to go down.

 

I have a good hand, in context, but not an unexpected hand in context.. more importantly, we have to decide, as a matter of philosophy in preempted auctions, whether it is more important to be able to suggest slam interest than it is to be able to make a competitive judgement call: is it better to play 5♥ as a slam try or as reflecting the view that it will be better for us to play 5♥ than to defend 5♣?

 

This is absolutely NOT a FP situation... we wouldn't be having this discussion if it were... or the discussion would be fundamentally different. Our 4♥ call was wide-range.... and no way does it promise that I will double (or bid) over 5♣ if partner passes, as he will, holding a minimum takeout double lacking in Aces.

 

It seems to me to be self-evident that the bid or pass scenario is going to be far more common than the 'can we make slam and can we evaluate correctly in that context' scenario.

 

So, to me, it is abundantly clear that the 5♥ reflects a preference to declare rather than to defend.

 

It will be made on hands opposite which we can make 12 tricks with our cards, but it should also be made on hands where 10 or (more commonly) 11 tricks are the limit even opposite this hand.

 

It is critical to understand and accept that their preemptive action has deprived us of the ability to show both types of hands... so we suck it up, and decide which approach is ON AVERAGE more effective.. and concede that this won't work all the time.

[jtfanclub]

While I agree that in standard bidding this is not a FP situation, mightn't this be a good situation to have it be a FP?

 

I really don't think 4♥ is more pre-emptive than 3♥...opps will take the double shot over 4♥ frequently when they would have died in 4♣ over 3♥. So maybe it's worth having a FP in this situation.

[han]

I think that is a horrible idea. We preempted, there is no reason while this should be our hand and we can't let them play undoubled.

[gnasher]

I was about to ask why MikeH thought it necessary to tell us that this wasn't a forcing pass situation, but then I saw the post that followed it.

 

Now I want to know how Mike knew that someone was going to make this suggestion. And can he use this strange power to predict other unlikely occurrences?

[jtfanclub]

Now I want to know how Mike knew that someone was going to make this suggestion.

I wouldn't have made the suggestion except for his post.

 

I'm just not convinced that 4♥ is actually more likely to keep them out of game than 3♥.

[han]

The goal of preempting is not to keep the opponents out of game, it is to make them guess. Often they'll bid game when they shouldn't.