ruling please

[shevek]

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=s852hkqt76djtcq94&w=saq964ha43dkcaj63&e=skt73h82da87542c8&s=sjhj95dq963ckt752]399|300|Scoring: IMP

1♠ - 3♠

4♣ - 4♦

4♥ - 4♠ *

4N - 5♥

6♠[/hv]

 

3♠ was limit raise = 10-12 TP, 4-cd support. 1♠ showed 5.

Cues at the 4-level.

* East paused for agreed 15 seconds before 4♠.

4NT was RKC.

 

12 tricks by setting up diamonds.

N-S said that East's hesitation suggested a second round heart or club control. West reckoned he had his 4NT bid. N-S observed that an immediate 4NT would do the trick, if West thought that was all he needed.

[mrdct]

Do we have any information as to the jurisdiction?

 

Are they cueing 1st or 2nd controls or just 1st round controls?

 

If East has shown a limit raise with 1st round control in ♦, I think it would be illogical for West not to make a further move towards slam.

[hotShot]

An immediate 4NT would not do the the trick. West had 6 loser, East 4♦ Cue bid, turned ♦K into a winner and the ♦A allows to drop another loser. So he's down to 4 loser and East still has 6-8 HCP left since he promised 10-12.

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sjt73hxxxdaqxcqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

This is just 9HCP and you can drop 2 ♥ loser on ♦AQ and slam makes if the ♣K is onside.[/hv]

 

Unfortunately I know a few people who would pass 4♠ with the West hand. So unless I can rule them out as peers, pass is a LA and bidding on is suggested by the hesitation.

[Mbodell]

I'm sympathetic if West thought he was fishing for a magic 7 and signed of in 6 over the expected 2 kc response, but I think pass is a LA. And I think 4nt is suggested by the hesitation. So I'd like a poll to make sure, but I think I'd be voting to roll it back.

[lamford]

An immediate 4NT would not do the the trick. West had 6 loser, East 4♦ Cue bid, turned ♦K into a winner ... <snip>

I think N/S meant an immediate 4NT instead of the 4H cue.

 

I would disallow the move by West, as I believe Pass to be an LA. I tried 5 of some reasonable players I know online and four of them moved on, and one passed. I think it is quite close, but the UI suggests extra values or shape, and we must carefully avoid using that. Opposite KJxx xx AQxx xxx, even the 5-level is not safe, but East cannot have that or he would have signed off briskly.

 

A 1000 deal simulation gave

10 tricks .009

11 tricks .181

12 tricks .511

13 tricks .299

 

However, a large number of those 12 and 13 trick hands would have moved beyond 4S over 4H, so I think it is clear to roll it back to 4S+2.

 

And by the way what possessed East to sign off in 4S, let alone slowly?

[ggwhiz]

I have to agree with the rolling it back to 4S brigade.

 

In the handful of NABC casebooks I've looked at, they seem to set the bar of pass being a logical altenative REALLY low.

 

When combined with the fact that the 4H cue looks to be fishing for a further (2nd round) cue that they didn't get when big black was available, it's a (non)slam dunk for me.