awm Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 Recently in a team event I had the following auction (all four players bidding): 1♥ - 1♠ - 4♥ - 4♠5♦ - Pass - 5♥ - ??? At this point it would be helpful for me to know what the 5♦ bid meant. I know of good players who use this as any of: (1) a slam try/cuebid (2) a second suit for competitive purposes (3) a purely lead directional bid. I had some interest in doubling 5♥ and/or competing to 5♠ and knowing which meaning of 5♦ was in use here would be helpful. Note that none of these are necessarily alertable (some might be delayed alerts) because the auction is well past game. Unfortunately, my hand included ♦AKxx and I really wanted partner to lead a diamond against the eventual contract. It seems that asking questions about the 5♦ bid would convey unauthorized information to partner and might well be seen as disallowing a diamond lead. Obviously there's nothing I can really do here to tell partner to lead a diamond, but I certainly don't want to convey UI which would bar partner from making the best lead. Is there any way out of this situation which permits me to inquire about the 5♦ call without effecting partner's lead options? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 Is there any way out of this situation which permits me to inquire about the 5♦ call without effecting partner's lead options? No. Your best option in general for this type of dilemma is to ask about the entire auction rather than one call, but on this particular auction it would be obvious what you were wondering about. Obviously this is an advantage for either screens or computers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 If it really matters, of course you ask. Partner was never going to lead a diamond anyway [insert coughing joke here]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 This is easy at the table. Look at the 5♥ card on the table as if this is really confusing to you. Turn to Opener and ask, "What the heck does 5♥ mean?!?!?" Then, if the response does not tell you what 5♦ meant, ask if he's showing one key card outside of diamonds. That should get Opener to say, "5♦ isn't Exclusion," with a strange look. Act surprised if he still doesn't say what 5♦ means, and then ask what Responder is supposed to show after this strange 5♦ call. If that doesn't work, tell partner to lead a damned diamond. The opponents are too dense to notice that comment anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 Agree with Josh. although I don't see a lot of reason to ask about ONE heart lol.. In practice I don't see a lot of issues with asking about 5♦ (after making some meaningless inquiries about 4♥ - do you play fit jumps? Is there another way to get to 4♥, such as 3N? is 4♥ wide ranging?). I think this line of questioning de-emphasizes the inquiry about 5♦, but its information you might want to know about anyway. At this point in the interrogation it seems normal to ask about 5♦, since the answer may influence your decision to bid on or double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodwintr Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 What do you think the odds are of getting a meaningful answer to an inquiry about five diamonds? You already know it doesn't show the ace. I confess that I wouldn't have a clear agreement about five diamonds in any partnership I have had, and would be compelled to answer the inquiry with something like, "He thinks it is the best bid on his hand given the circumstances." I would expect most players to answer in much the same way, although perhaps not in those exact words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 What do you think the odds are of getting a meaningful answer to an inquiry about five diamonds? You already know it doesn't show the ace. I confess that I wouldn't have a clear agreement about five diamonds in any partnership I have had, and would be compelled to answer the inquiry with something like, "He thinks it is the best bid on his hand given the circumstances." I would expect most players to answer in much the same way, although perhaps not in those exact words. My answer would be "it shows a side suit, in order to help me decide whether to compete in case you bid 5♠". I would expect most players to answer in much the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodwintr Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 No fair, Cherdanno: you HAVE an agreement . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted July 12, 2009 Report Share Posted July 12, 2009 Thanks, kenrexford, but it is not really funny. It is a problem, and if you ask in this situation you may have to live the consequences. Personally I would think on this hand you have some idea how it was meant so it is not worth asking, but that does not answer the general problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossoneri Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 Thanks, kenrexford, but it is not really funny. It is a problem, and if you ask in this situation you may have to live the consequences. Personally I would think on this hand you have some idea how it was meant so it is not worth asking, but that does not answer the general problem. You will get used to Ken's brand of humour in a while... Granted, asking about 5♦ does create UI, but I don't see how the UI demonstrably suggests a diamond lead, or am I missing something? There would seem to be a lot of different reasons why one would ask about 5♦... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 Thanks, kenrexford, but it is not really funny. It is a problem, and if you ask in this situation you may have to live the consequences. Personally I would think on this hand you have some idea how it was meant so it is not worth asking, but that does not answer the general problem. Some pairs may play this as purely lead-directing (could be a void), on the rationale that there is no need to involved the partner who preempted. Looking at ♦AKxx, the shortness is not so unlikely, and you want to double if it is a side suit, but bid on if it was a void. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfi Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 I can't really imagine anyone making a decision on this hand without knowing what 5♦ means, so asking about it seems routine. Suggesting that it discloses anything specific about your hand is a big stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 I can't really imagine anyone making a decision on this hand without knowing what 5♦ means, so asking about it seems routine. Suggesting that it discloses anything specific about your hand is a big stretch.I agree with sfi. In fact, I would go further: You already have a ton of UI from the fact that partner passed 5♦ without asking what it meant. Partner's not asking means that he:- truely does not want to bid anything, regardless of what 5♦ meansor- thinks that the opponents don't know what 5♦ means. Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 or he could not be bothered to ask or he feels no compulsion to ask because he does not need to know yet or ...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 or, of course, that he already knows what it means having played against these guys (with a different partner) before. In response to the OP, yeah, sometimes even bridge isn't perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.