Partner has gone crazy (twice)

[brianshark]

These two decisions were thrust upon me by two seperate partners in two seperate competitions a few months apart. Partner is known to be usually fairly sane and a fairly strong player, in both cases.

 

1. IMPs, favourable, you hold:

 

♠A962 ♥AJ74 ♦ AK87 ♣T

 

You are playing strong, 5, and a polish 1♣ (which includes all hands with 15+ pts and 5+ clubs (unbalanced) or any hand with 18+ pts). 2♣ would be precision style. We don't play namyats if it matters.

 

Partner deals and opens 6♣s, RHO passes, your call?

 

2. IMPs, all vul, you hold:

 

♠AKQ3 ♥Q84 ♦ 76 ♣AKJ8

 

You are playing weak, 5, 1♣ is 2+. 2♣s is strong and we don't play namyats either.

 

You deal and the auction goes:

 

1♣ - 1♥ - 6♣ - Pass

???

 

Your call.

[benlessard]

7C in both case. In case 1 i prefer 7C to 7Nt just in case partner got 10 or 11 clubs to the KQJ.

[dicklont]

1. 7♣

Although partner does not want me to do anything. I'm quite convinced that he has nine solid clubs. I could bid 7NT but it is IMP´s so I take that small loss for the time partner holds ten not so solid clubs.

 

2. Pass

So he has a void in hearts but there is no garantee that partner holds diamond ace.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 7C is clear, maybe 7NT.

I doubt partner has a 6C opening bid, given

that I hold 3 Aces.

 

#2 Pass.

I assume you play a forcing raise in the minor.

I am hard pressed to find a possible hand, but

maybe partner holds a 7 card clubs suit and a

heart void.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[hotShot]

1) pass

 

If partner has a 12-card suit with the ace, I expect him to find a better way to bid that.

 

So the only sane reason to open 6♣ I can imagine,

is a weak preempt with an 8+ length in ♣ without the A.

Why else would partner preempt on the 6 level.

 

Now I expect him to make and I will redouble should opps dbl.

 

2) 7♣

 

There are only 3 HCP in the black suits I don't have, and he should be void in ♥ so he has to have ♦A.

[Guest Jlall]

I would kick it in in both cases, unless my partner was hrothgar in which case I pass.

[Free]

7NT and pass

[rbforster]

1. 7♣. I'm envisioning hands with long clubs and very short in the majors here. If he had a better hand, he might have taken it more slowly given we seem to have good methods. I'll take my chances and hope he's got AK 9th or so.

 

2. Pass. Here we have a much more constructive auction with our side opening. There's not reason to totally jam the auction on a good hand if you're willing to bid 6♣ eventually. Will the opps really bid 6♥ over you after your partner opened and you make a limit+? I think partner has a preemptive hand with long clubs and a heart void. Not willing to bet on the A♦ too for this one.

[Guest Jlall]

I really have no clue about these hands and can't imagine them ever occurring but the only thing I really don't like is a 7N bid on the first board. What is the point of risking a HUGE disaster like down 8 doubled when partner has KQJ 11th or some random hand he chose to open a 6C "preempt" with? To try and gain 2 imps or to avoid an 8-0 split the wrong way where they ruff the opening lead? It is really silly to be bidding 7N.

[whereagles]

I'm going with 7♣ and pass. Too many ifs in 2nd hand.

[pclayton]

7♣ on the 1st. I've convinced myself pard has 9 clubs to the AK. Pard could be missing a trump honor but he rates not to. I agree with Justin that 7N is silly. I'll lose two if I'm in the lower scoring grand, but I'm not going to lose a zillion.

 

Pass in the 2nd. Agree with whereagles - too many 'ifs'.

[TimG]

On the first, I think opener has ♠KQJx and nine solid clubs (or similar). jdonn would have opened 4N asking for specific aces.

 

The second could be a 5 or 7 hand.

[mikeh]

7♣ on the 1st one, altho I am not as sure as Justin that 7N is silly. Opposite me, 7♣ is silly... throwing away 2 imps for no good reason, but opposite most players, 7♣ is the more cautious and reasonable shot.

 

On the second one, pass. All I know is that partner does not have his bid... I wouldn't be at all surprised to make 7, perhaps on the lead of whichever red suit he is void in, but I am not going to make the 'master bid' of 7♣ and find that he already won the board for us by his weird call and I just gave it back.

[cherdano]

♠KQJx ♥- ♦- ♣KQJxxxxx2, your opening bid?

[jtfanclub]

♠KQJx ♥- ♦- ♣KQJxxxxx2, your opening bid?

I'd open it 1 club, the Rule of Spades applies.

If I had, say, KQTx in hearts instead, I might be tempted to open 6♣.

 

I'm trying to figure out how 6♦ would be read over 6♣. I too have an 8 card suit? Or I have a hand that's unsure whether to be in 6NT, 7♣ or 7NT, please help me?

[whereagles]

♠KQJx ♥- ♦- ♣KQJxxxxx2, your opening bid?

5♣. Seems to be within the odds.

[TimG]

♠KQJx ♥- ♦- ♣KQJxxxxx2, your opening bid?

I'd open it 1 club, the Rule of Spades applies.

I don't know the rule of spades, but I call KQJxxxxxx trumps (even if the smallest spot is the deuce).

[hotShot]

♠KQJx ♥- ♦- ♣KQJxxxxx2, your opening bid?

I'd open it 1 club, the Rule of Spades applies.

I don't know the rule of spades, but I call KQJxxxxxx trumps (even if the smallest spot is the deuce).

Remember that the 1♣ opening is defined as:

polish 1♣ (which includes all hands with 15+ pts and 5+ clubs (unbalanced) or any hand with 18+ pts)

Responder has so many ♣'s that the chance partner hold the 18+ pts is relevant.

With a strong hand as shown why should he jump to 6♣?

Holding ♠xxx ♥- ♦- ♣QJ98765432 you would not care to know how strong opener is and you would find it more likely that opps would be able to make 6♥.

[ArtK78]

I have a policy that I do not raise jumps to slam without extreme provocation (another way of saying I don't bid grand slams on speculation).

 

Since I do not have the AK of trump, I would never raise the 6♣ opening bid on 1.

 

And since I have no rational way of determining whether partner has both red suits under first round control (and I strongly suspect that he does not) I pass 6C on 2 and hope we don't go down too many.

 

There is a lot of room between the one level and the six level. Partner certainly had the means at his disposal to make some other call than 6♣ in both cases. I am not playing him for the perfect hand for a grand. If he has the right hand, he probably should not have made the call that he did.

[benlessard]

I dont believe the number of passer for hand 2. Show me a hand where you would bid 6C red vs red when your partner promise only 2 clubs

[the hog]

Pass the first and definitely pass the second. If pd bids like this....well...but it is an academic discussion anyway.

[jdonn]

On the first, I think opener has ♠KQJx and nine solid clubs (or similar). jdonn would have opened 4N asking for specific aces.

Lol is this really so unusual that I am referred to when the possibility arises?

[pclayton]

♠KQJx ♥- ♦- ♣KQJxxxxx2, your opening bid?

I'd open it 1 club, the Rule of Spades applies.

I don't know the rule of spades, but I call KQJxxxxxx trumps (even if the smallest spot is the deuce).

Remember that the 1♣ opening is defined as:

polish 1♣ (which includes all hands with 15+ pts and 5+ clubs (unbalanced) or any hand with 18+ pts)

Responder has so many ♣'s that the chance partner hold the 18+ pts is relevant.

With a strong hand as shown why should he jump to 6♣?

Holding ♠xxx ♥- ♦- ♣QJ98765432 you would not care to know how strong opener is and you would find it more likely that opps would be able to make 6♥.

Do we really have to bend over backwards to show a 10 card suit missing the AK? Such silly examples.

[brianshark]

First of all, we should all acknowledge that the 6♣ bid on both auctions should not happen. No hand partner could have would completely justify a direct jump to 6♣. So he's taken some extravagance but we just have to figure out on either hand whether it's worth making more of a gamble after a bid that's known to not be known what it means... if you get what I mean.

 

On the first hand, I deduced that because I was staring at all those aces that it was highly unlikely partner was bidding to make. Therefore he is bidding pre-emptively. And I believe that a hand with 9+ solid clubs is much too good to risk pre-empting because your staring at 9 notrump tricks at the very least. Therefore a broken suit seems more likely and I passed.

 

Parner turned up with TEN ♣s to the AQJ but we struck gold when the suit broke 0-2 offside. I think the auction at the other table was a more sane 5♣-6♣-P though my memory was a little vague... maybe that was the suggested auction in the post-match analysis.

 

On the second hand, there is so much more variables and possibilities. A few people in this thread said that because you just can't be sure what partner holds, it's best to play it safe and I completely agree. Not finding a grand is bad, but finding one that doesn't make is a heck of a lot worse.

 

Maybe I just had the above 6♣ in my head but I decided to play it safe and pass this one as well. LHO doubled with his 2 red aces and led his ♦A. Partner turned up with ♠x ♥- ♦KQTxx ♣QT9xxxx, there was no ruff and I quickly claimed 12 tricks. I think the other table played in 5♣.

 

Later in the session (playing with the partner from hand 2), there was an auction that went (all white with partner opening)

1♠ - (2♦) - P - P

6♥ - All pass

 

Partner has ♠KQJTxxx ♥AKJxx ♦- ♣x, I table ♠T ♥9xxx ♦Kxx ♣Qxxx. Defense cash their 2 aces and pard lost another trick with ♥Qxx offside. At the other table our teammates pushed them to 5♠ but the defence slipped and allowed them to make. buckets of imps out. Maybe that'll learn him. :)

[benlessard]

First of all, we should all acknowledge that the 6♣ bid on both auctions should not happen. No hand partner could have would completely justify a direct jump to 6♣.

 

I disagree with that statement. Its not because its very unlikely that i hold a 11 card suit that i cannot bid it when i have one. I dont remember having a 11 card suit in my life, but if i have one at least I can say that its likely to be headed by AK.

 

AK 11th or 10th with a KQx outside look like a 6C opening for me.

 

 

As for hand 2.

 

---

---

AKQJx

QT9xxxxx

 

is my idea of a 6C bid. Bidding 6C (RED) purely as preempt with no hope of making it make no sense.