Is a bid justified?

[se12sam]

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sjtxhj987xdxcqtxx]133|100|Scoring: MP

The bidding so far:

East South West North

1♦ - pass - 1♠ - 2♣

3♠* - 4♣ - 4♠ - pass**

pass - ???[/hv]

You are South.

* The stop card was used and you bid 4♣ after an appropriate pause.

** Partner hesitates (noticeable/not disputed) before passing

At MPs, does your hand still have a sound bridge reason to bid 5♣? Would appreciate your comments and poll choice

[helene_t]

Couple of thought:

 

My own spade holding suggests that partner was thinking of bidding 5♣ rather than dbl. This may depend somewhat on the meaning of a dbl by partner in this situation.

 

A "noticeable" hesitation is not necessarily a BIT in this auction, I think. Depends on partner's habits.

 

So it's not quite clear to me what my ethical obligations are. I would pass just to be safe.

[se12sam]

A "noticeable" hesitation is not necessarily a BIT in this auction, I think. Depends on partner's habits.

OK, a clarification. I am not a director and am not sure how a director would rule. But I think the noticeable hesitation in this specific instance would qualify as a BIT.

[655321]

Bidding 4♣ then 5♣ is just bad bridge, never mind the hesitation. The previous round was the time to decide how many clubs to bid. East apparently decided (wrongly IMO) to bid only 4♣. So it seems to me very hard to argue that something about his hand has changed, suddenly making the hand worth 5♣.

 

Without the hesitation East could take this bad 2 step path to 5♣, but I don't think he can still do it after the hesitation.

[gnasher]

Your poll options seem strange. There are four rational options:

 

- Pass, because it's the right call

- Pass, because it's the logical alternative not suggested by the UI

- 5♣, because pass isn't a logical alternative

- 5♣, because the UI doesn't suggest 5♣ over pass.

 

In particular:

- It's not sufficient to have a "sound bridge reason" for bidding 5♣. The test is whether pass is a logical alternative.

- Getting the director before bidding is pointless: even if he knows that he's going to adjust it back to 4♠, he can't tell you not to bid 5♣. All you'd do is waste everybody's time.

 

On this occasion, I think it's clear that the UI suggests bidding 5♣, and equally clear that pass is a logical alternative, so pass is required by the rules.

[ArtK78]

Bidding 4♣ then 5♣ is just bad bridge, never mind the hesitation. The previous round was the time to decide how many clubs to bid. East apparently decided (wrongly IMO) to bid only 4♣. So it seems to me very hard to argue that something about his hand has changed, suddenly making the hand worth 5♣.

 

Without the hesitation East could take this bad 2 step path to 5♣, but I don't think he can still do it after the hesitation.

My thoughts exactly.

 

If you bid 5♣ now, there are two possible outcomes, both of which are bad. If 5♣ turns out to be the winning action, the auction will be moved back to 4♠. And if 5♣ turns out to be the losing action, it will be allowed to stand.

 

It would have been a bad idea to bid 5♣ on this auction without the hesitation. After the hesitation, it is just a no-win action.

[se12sam]

At the table I passed. However, I was seriously considering bidding 5♣ -- I did not bid because of partner's hesitation. My "sound bridge reason" line of thought was as follows:

1. Based on opponents bidding, partner most likely had 0 or 1 ♠ cards

2. I have a singleton diamond -- only one loser there.

3. If North's 3♠ jump bid shows some distribution (most likely) then partner must have heart values as well.

If partner had not hesitated, I thought I had a good 5♣ sacrifice going.

 

Partner's hand was: ♠x ♥KQx ♦KJTx ♣KJ9xx    }Partner's diamonds were worthless (♦AQ were over the dummy) despite which

And as above, I held: ♠JTx ♥J987x ♦x ♣QTxx   } our side has 9 tricks for -300. Spades were 5-4, hearts were 3-2 and 4♠ was making easily.

 

Bidding 4♣ then 5♣ is just bad bridge, never mind the hesitation.  The previous round was the time to decide how many clubs to bid.  East apparently decided (wrongly IMO) to bid only 4♣.  So it seems to me very hard to argue that something about his hand has changed, suddenly making the hand worth 5♣.

I fully agree, it was poor judgement on my part to bid only 4♣. However, I believe there was additional information available to me after the 4♠ bid (assuming no hesitation by partner)

a. It increases the possibility of a 5-4 or 6-4 spade split. Until then a 4-4 spade fit was possible (increases our loser by one)

b. It reduces the possibility of our side having club tricks in 4♠. Opponents will choose to play 4♣X if both of them have club losers.

[shevek]

Pass is clear. You chose to bid 4♣ to involve partner and partner chose to defend. End of story.

[hanp]

What 655321 said.

 

I also think you should NEVER call the director in such a situation, whatever you try to do. If you are playing against beginners who don't know the rules then you can remind them that they can call the director.

[pirate22]

you made a rod for yourself ---bid 5 cl early regards