Push for slam?

[awm]

♠AKxxx

♥AJxx

♦-

♣AQJx

 

PA-PA-3♦-X

PA-3♥-PA-??

 

After two passes, RHO opens 3♦ and you double. What's your plan over partners' 3♥?

[JLOL]

4D planning to pass 4H. A little wimpy admittedly.

[skjaeran]

4D planning to pass 4H. A little wimpy admittedly.

Agree about the plan, but I don't find it wimpy.

[Vilgan]

4♦ and pass camp for me. Its definitely one of those hands that gets people salivating. Its also one of those hands that many people fall in love with and push too far (imo).

[Apollo81]

agree with previous posts

[kenrexford]

As for the actual question. 4♥ for me. 4♦ is asking the impossible of partner, IMO, and I cannot get the info I need. So, I might as well avoid some risk that 4♦ is misinterpreted. Get easily to where I know we will end.

[neilkaz]

4♦ for me flashing a slam signal to PD who will sign off with junk and continue onward if he has a max for 3♥

[jdonn]

As for the actual question. 4♥ for me. 4♦ is asking the impossible of partner, IMO, and I cannot get the info I need. So, I might as well avoid some risk that 4♦ is misinterpreted. Get easily to where I know we will end.

Wow. 4♦ of all bids to think it could be misinterpreted, and Ken of all people to be worried about it! Weirrrrdddd.

[JLOL]

As for the actual question. 4♥ for me. 4♦ is asking the impossible of partner, IMO, and I cannot get the info I need. So, I might as well avoid some risk that 4♦ is misinterpreted. Get easily to where I know we will end.

Huh? Why is it asking the impossible of pard. If he has a maximum he will move. For instance if partner has KQxxx of hearts and we bid 4D he would have to be braindead to bid 4H. If partner has Hxxxx of hearts and the CK he would again have to be braindead not to move over 4D.

 

I am only really baffled by this comment because it is coming from you, the king of trying for slam whenever it's slightly possible, here it is easily possible and on the hands where it is very good partner will always move, and partner will probably not be moving too much with hands where slam is terrible or the 5 level is in jeopardy (maybe Qxxx of hearts and the DA where you get to 5H), but overall when you get past 4H after bidding 4D it will be a great thing.

[mtvesuvius]

4♦, then I pass 4♥ and bid appropriately over other calls.

[kenrexford]

Boy, I would have thought that two people knew me better.

[rogerclee]

I guess I am in the minority when I say that I think this hand is just barely good enough for 4♦. I am happy to pass partner's 4♥ bid over this.

[awm]

Do you really expect partner to move over 4♦ holding one of:

 

xx

Kxxxx

xxx

xxx

 

Qxx

Kxxx

xx

xxxx

 

xxx

Qxxxx

xx

Kxx

 

Qxx

Txxxx

xxx

xx

 

It seems like in all these cases slam ranges from pretty good to really good. Partner is more likely to have one or two scattered cards like this than to have absolutely nothing. I wouldn't really expect partner to bid past 4♥ on any of these hands.

[jdonn]

4♦. Adam's right we won't find every fair slam, but that doesn't bother me. There of course isn't room to show everything so we just show our strength and hope partner can move if it's right.

[Finch]

I'm very happy not to be in slam with many of awm's sample hands. I know I'm a bit of a pessimist, but Qxx Kxxx xx xxxx? The 5-level is in jeopardy opposite that hand (just try it on a club lead...)

 

I'll bid 4D and pass 4H. Yes, we will miss some good slams. It's a guess whether overall we are plus or minus imp expectation overall.

[JLOL]

I would really expect partner to move with Qxxxx of hearts and the CK.

 

I also think that even though we could clearly miss some good slams we have no 5 level safety opposite a hand that signs off over 4D and we will get too high much more often than getting to a good slam by bidding again.

[whereagles]

4♥ for me, willing to give up on slam.

[orlam]

4♥ for me, willing to give up on slam.

Why?

[mikeh]

4♥ for me, willing to give up on slam.

how can it possibly hurt to bid 4♦? Assuming that you are allowed to make a cue bid, if not now, when?

 

I think that justin is a little optimistic in his assessment of when partner will co-operate (not when partner 'should' cooperate)... probably because he is used to discussing these auctions with experts as opposed to the average player... too many players bid 3♥, limiting their hand, then fail to appreciate how good their weak hand becomes after a 4♦ cue... but the hand isn't good enough to take control... so the cooperative 4♦ it is.

[JLOL]

I think that justin is a little optimistic in his assessment of when partner will co-operate (not when partner 'should' cooperate)... probably because he is used to discussing these auctions with experts as opposed to the average player... too many players bid 3♥, limiting their hand, then fail to appreciate how good their weak hand becomes after a 4♦ cue... but the hand isn't good enough to take control... so the cooperative 4♦ it is.

Umm, I play way more boards with clients than experts, I just think that unless specified that partner is not trustworthy you are supposed to assume partner will make the "right" bids. I totally agree that with a weak partner they are far less likely to cooperate, in fact they probably will never cooperate.

[Fluffy]

I think we will miss some slams by bidding 4♦ then passing, but such is life.

 

This somehow depends as always on what is the minimum partner expects for our double, playing fairly solid doubles helps finding slams.

[whereagles]

4♥ for me, willing to give up on slam.

how can it possibly hurt to bid 4♦? Assuming that you are allowed to make a cue bid, if not now, when?

I would bid 4♦ if I were sure pard would take it as heart fit + extras. Since I'm not 100% sure he will, I won't muddy the waters. This should not be a problem in a seasoned partnership, of course.

 

Other reasons to be pessimistic about slam are 1. it's not easy for pard to evaluate the diamond wastage (he doesn't know I'm void) and 2. my trump isn't that hot and bad breaks may be lurking. Sure, pard may have 5, but who knows?

[mikeh]

I think that justin is a little optimistic in his assessment of when partner will co-operate (not when partner 'should' cooperate)... probably because he is used to discussing these auctions with experts as opposed to the average player... too many players bid 3♥, limiting their hand, then fail to appreciate how good their weak hand becomes after a 4♦ cue... but the hand isn't good enough to take control... so the cooperative 4♦ it is.

Umm, I play way more boards with clients than experts, I just think that unless specified that partner is not trustworthy you are supposed to assume partner will make the "right" bids. I totally agree that with a weak partner they are far less likely to cooperate, in fact they probably will never cooperate.

That's why I wrote 'discussing', rather than 'playing' :P

[jdonn]

I would bid 4♦ if I were sure pard would take it as heart fit + extras. Since I'm not 100% sure he will, I won't muddy the waters. This should not be a problem in a seasoned partnership, of course.

I don't think it should be a problem with anyone. Or let's say, with an even remotely seasoned bridge player. :lol:

[whereagles]

I would bid 4♦ if I were sure pard would take it as heart fit + extras. Since I'm not 100% sure he will, I won't muddy the waters. This should not be a problem in a seasoned partnership, of course.

I don't think it should be a problem with anyone. Or let's say, with an even remotely seasoned bridge player. :)

Ok, I'll leave you to win the post-mortem while I win at table :)