Guess again

[the hog]

Josh, I take it you read:

"If North had bid four of a minor, that would have been natural and forcing"

This means there is no real point to 6C unless pd is 2 suited. As this is an expert table, I think you need to take that inference into account. That is of course, unless you think your partner is an idiot who just likes to bid for the sake of it.

Yes, I have played high stakes rb, though not hs Chicago.

[gwnn]

So how would you have taken 5S and 5NT Hog? I am just wondering. Please don't insult me :)

[dburn]

With both minors partner could have bid 5S or 5NT.

5S? Isn't that a grand slam try in hearts?

Not after they have made a penalty double.

And after they have made a striped-tailed-ape double?

[gnasher]

And after they have made a striped-tailed-ape double?

Wouldn't you just redouble? It's true that if 7♥ is making, 5♥xx will score only £420 instead of £453, but it seems unlikely that responder will be sufficiently sure of his ground to want to drive 7♥ for that reason.

[MickyB]

And after they have made a striped-tailed-ape double?

Wouldn't you just redouble? It's true that if 7♥ is making, 5♥xx will score only £420 instead of £453, but it seems unlikely that responder will be sufficiently sure of his ground to want to drive 7♥ for that reason.

And if he was, he'd probably just bid it?

[wank]

seems churlish to blue this - we have prime cards, but we did force partner to the 6 level when he was perhaps only planning to play 3nt or 5c and he can probably infer a relative lack of spade cards from the 5H bid.

 

partner surely doesn't have a spade void or he'd just start with 4C so it seems unlikely this is a laydown anyway.

 

'correcting' the strain is just living in a parallel universe - the methods might not be to your desired level of sophistication, but partner would have found something to bid over 5Hx with the minors.

[the hog]

So how would you have taken 5S and 5NT Hog? I am just wondering. Please don't insult me :D

Good question. To be honest, I am not sure. However, I still contend that if responder is not 2 suited he bid the hand like an idiot, which he clearly is not based on David's scenario.

Anyway, I would like to see the hand.

 

"'correcting' the strain is just living in a parallel universe " This sort of comment is a wank. Why would partner not show a single suited hand with Cs, by bidding the damn suit!

[jdonn]

Josh, I take it you read:

"If North had bid four of a minor, that would have been natural and forcing"

This means there is no real point to 6C unless pd is 2 suited. As this is an expert table, I think you need to take that inference into account. That is of course, unless you think your partner is an idiot who just likes to bid for the sake of it.

Yes, I have played high stakes rb, though not hs Chicago.

He was obviously hoping you would bid 3NT, there is nothing more to it.

 

And what you really mean is there is no real point to 3♠ unless partner is two suited. Obviously at the time when he bid 6♣ there was quite a lot of point to it if he had just clubs.

 

And an expert, playing for money, does not bid a suit showing two suits when another bid would very clearly show two suits. If he bids a suit that is the suit he has.

[dburn]

Josh, I take it you read:

"If North had bid four of a minor, that would have been natural and forcing"

This means there is no real point to 6C unless pd is 2 suited. As this is an expert table, I think you need to take that inference into account. That is of course, unless you think your partner is an idiot who just likes to bid for the sake of it.

Yes, I have played high stakes rb, though not hs Chicago.

He was obviously hoping you would bid 3NT, there is nothing more to it.

And how could he be hoping that? I mean, if the next hand had passed, you would have bid 4♥ with four whether or not you had a spade stop, and you would have bid 3NT if you did not have four hearts whether or not you had a spade stop. It is one thing to hope that partner can bid 3NT, but it is quite another thing when even if he bids it, you will have no idea whether or not it is the right contract.

 

Still, thanks to all who have contributed. I will come clean about the full hand shortly, but there may be more to be said by others first.

[the hog]

David beat me to it. It is a bit hard to go back to 3NT after a 4H bid.

[jdonn]

It's possible to reach 3NT if you double 3♠. It's impossible to reach 3NT if you bid 4 of a minor.

[MFA]

If 6♣ is not just clubs then it's beyond me, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if I misunderstood most of the tricky calls in that actual game. I would have assumed that those stone axe methods would imply that bidding clubs meant clubs, but that is probably just silly me.

[Fluffy]

I don't like your approach in the 3♠ cuebid David, why bid 3NT without a stopper instead of 4m?, the latter seems like a better approach to me or at least more "natural"

[cherdanno]

Josh, I take it you read:

"If North had bid four of a minor, that would have been natural and forcing"

This means there is no real point to 6C unless pd is 2 suited. As this is an expert table, I think you need to take that inference into account. That is of course, unless you think your partner is an idiot who just likes to bid for the sake of it.

Yes, I have played high stakes rb, though not hs Chicago.

He was obviously hoping you would bid 3NT, there is nothing more to it.

And how could he be hoping that? I mean, if the next hand had passed, you would have bid 4♥ with four whether or not you had a spade stop, and you would have bid 3NT if you did not have four hearts whether or not you had a spade stop. It is one thing to hope that partner can bid 3NT, but it is quite another thing when even if he bids it, you will have no idea whether or not it is the right contract.

But maybe partner is world class and realizes that it is better to sometimes play 3NT with a stopper despite having a heart fit, than not being able to check for a stopper when having a long minor suit? And since he knows I am world class too, he will also realize that I realize that and so I will take 3S primarily as a stopper ask, and only bid 4H when I have four hearts and no stopper?

[the hog]

Arend, if he is looking to play 3NT, he has now upped the ante significanlty with 6C. So if your premise is correct, then it appears that the 5H bid was a big mistake. Or else he didn't anticipate the possibility of a 4H or 5H bid However he looks short of S as I have 3. Is he short of H as well? If he is short of Hs then he should have anticipated a H response from me, as clearly I can have a 5 card H suit, (cf this hand).

[gnasher]

But maybe partner is world class and realizes that it is better to sometimes play 3NT with a stopper despite having a heart fit, than not being able to check for a stopper when having a long minor suit? And since he knows I am world class too, he will also realize that I realize that and so I will take 3S primarily as a stopper ask, and only bid 4H when I have four hearts and no stopper?

If that were a possibility, why would David Burn, who is not, so far as we can tell, a gibbering idiot, say that "3♠ ...is defined within the game as 'Stayman in principle, but if that's not what he has, he will have some other kind of game force.'" and that "North has no way specifically to ask you to bid 3NT with a spade guard"?

[Fluffy]

so... who guessed correctly? B)

[dburn]

so... who guessed correctly? :P

Those who bid six diamonds were about £300 better off than those who did not, at any rate (non-vulnerable, so plus 920 instead of minus 100).

 

I was actually 0-1-6-6 without many points (♠None ♥x ♦Q109xxxx ♣K1098xx) so six clubs was down one (clubs 3-2 onside) but six diamonds would have made.

 

I suppose I should just have bid three diamonds (non-forcing), expecting further bidding after which I could show my hand rather more easily (or at any rate, less ambiguously). But it was possible that there might not be any further bidding - after all, we allegedly held half the deck in high cards, and if partner had four or five spades, 3♦ might have been passed out. Mind you, if he had a bunch of spades maybe we couldn't make game anyway.

 

It never occurred to me that if I bid 3♠ and then removed hearts (or notrump) to clubs, partner would play me for a one-suiter. I mean, if I had a one-suiter, couldn't I just bid four clubs? I did consider that if it went 3♠-Pass-4♥-Pass-5♣ partner might think this was a control bid of some kind, but concluded that even he should not so believe. Following this master plan, I removed hearts to clubs at a rather higher level than I had hoped, but...

 

...what I stupidly failed to consider was that after 5♥ was doubled, I could have bid 5NT for the minors. As percipient posters here have pointed out, that is what I certainly should have done. But it took even Zia a full five minutes into his tirade to work this out, so maybe at the table it was not as obvious as all that.

[Bbradley62]

So, if it took Zia five minutes into his tirade to think of 5NT, he read 6♣ as both minors and corrected to 6♦?

[the hog]

so... who guessed correctly? :P

Those who bid six diamonds were about £300 better off than those who did not, at any rate (non-vulnerable, so plus 920 instead of minus 100).

 

I was actually 0-1-6-6 without many points (♠None ♥x ♦Q109xxxx ♣K1098xx) so six clubs was down one (clubs 3-2 onside) but six diamonds would have made.

 

I suppose I should just have bid three diamonds (non-forcing), expecting further bidding after which I could show my hand rather more easily (or at any rate, less ambiguously). But it was possible that there might not be any further bidding - after all, we allegedly held half the deck in high cards, and if partner had four or five spades, 3♦ might have been passed out. Mind you, if he had a bunch of spades maybe we couldn't make game anyway.

 

It never occurred to me that if I bid 3♠ and then removed hearts (or notrump) to clubs, partner would play me for a one-suiter. I mean, if I had a one-suiter, couldn't I just bid four clubs? I did consider that if it went 3♠-Pass-4♥-Pass-5♣ partner might think this was a control bid of some kind, but concluded that even he should not so believe. Following this master plan, I removed hearts to clubs at a rather higher level than I had hoped, but...

 

...what I stupidly failed to consider was that after 5♥ was doubled, I could have bid 5NT for the minors. As percipient posters here have pointed out, that is what I certainly should have done. But it took even Zia a full five minutes into his tirade to work this out, so maybe at the table it was not as obvious as all that.

Thank you for posting the follow up David. Yes, 5NT would have made it crystal clear, but as I stated in my posts, if you thought it though logically, you had to be 2 suited for this bidding.

[dburn]

So, if it took Zia five minutes into his tirade to think of 5NT, he read 6♣ as both minors and corrected to 6♦?

No, of course not. He passed in about half a second and prepared to blame me for being a gibbering idiot. He was probably right about that, although if he'd actually had the jack of clubs (so that his absurd 1NT opening was at least within range) I'd have made it anyway.

[mich-b]

I was actually 0-1-6-6 without many points (♠None  ♥x  ♦Q109xxxx  ♣K1098xx) so six clubs was down one (clubs 3-2 onside) but six diamonds would have made.

 

Wasn't 4NT for the minors available on the 1st round ?

I guess it was ace asking...otherwise you surely would have used it.... :unsure:

[CSGibson]

I was actually 0-1-6-6 without many points (♠None  ♥x  ♦Q109xxxx  ♣K1098xx) so six clubs was down one (clubs 3-2 onside) but six diamonds would have made.

 

Wasn't 4NT for the minors available on the 1st round ?

4N is probably natural & quantitative; 4♠ probably should be minors, but maybe something Baronish too.

[hanp]

I thought the hand already was in range for 1NT.

[cherdanno]

But maybe partner is world class and realizes that it is better to sometimes play 3NT with a stopper despite having a heart fit, than not being able to check for a stopper when having a long minor suit? And since he knows I am world class too, he will also realize that I realize that and so I will take 3S primarily as a stopper ask, and only bid 4H when I have four hearts and no stopper?

If that were a possibility, why would David Burn, who is not, so far as we can tell, a gibbering idiot, say that "3♠ ...is defined within the game as 'Stayman in principle, but if that's not what he has, he will have some other kind of game force.'" and that "North has no way specifically to ask you to bid 3NT with a spade guard"?

Are you sure that the 3♠ bid was defined that tightly in the pre-game discussions? Are you sure that if you asked Zia whether a one-suited minor hand without a stopper might be 3♠ here, trying to get to 3N, he would say "No way!"?

(And that would make neither David Burn nor Zia a gibbering idiot, nor would it tell us they are not world class.)