Pass or raise to 6?

[Little Kid]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sahat862daq75cq83]133|100|Scoring: MP

(Pass) - 1♥ -   (Pass) - 1NT*

(Pass) - 2♦**-(Pass) -  5♦

(Pass) -  ?

 

*1NT = Forcing

**2♦ = 4+♦[/hv]

 

Your style is to open quite agressively (any 5-4 11 count qualifies). Partner will not play 2♠ as a good ♦ raise in this sequence.

[pooltuna]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sahat862daq75cq83]133|100|Scoring: MP

(Pass) - 1♥ -   (Pass) - 1NT*

(Pass) - 2♦**-(Pass) -  5♦

(Pass) -  ?

 

*1NT = Forcing

**2♦ = 4+♦[/hv]

 

Your style is to open quite agressively (any 5-4 11 count qualifies). Partner will not play 2♠ as a good ♦ raise in this sequence.

Partner appears to have 3 or fewer ♠, 2 or fewer ♥, a long ♦ suit of 5+ cards and his values rate to be in ♣ this seems like an auto 6♦ as this is MP and you will be losing to those who get to 3NT anyway if that is the correct strain.

[gwnn]

no bid

[sectorzz9]

I'm not bidding. Partner must have had some way of raising us constructively and he didn't choose that route so I will respect his choice - even if it's wrong. I can always shoot him later.

[Bbradley62]

Agree with zz9. Partner knows you might have this hand and he said he doesn't care.

[gwnn]

I could think of a few cases when I'd bid 6♦, in particular when my partner is weak or I am an evil shark (don't take it personally pooltuna :P ). I would never bid 6♦ if my partner hesitated.

[pooltuna]

I could think of a few cases when I'd bid 6♦, in particular when my partner is weak or I am an evil shark (don't take it personally pooltuna :P ). I would never bid 6♦ if my partner hesitated.

yep! partner hesitation=automatic pass for me

[gnasher]

The auction doesn't sound like one where we should be bidding, but then what has partner got? xx x KJxxxx KJxx?

 

We'd have bid this way with an ace less and a 2542 shape. That adds up to siginficant extra values. I'd bid six.

[Hanoi5]

I pass. Where was the hesitation anyway?

[gwnn]

Nowhere.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

 

Even, if your p does not play 2S, he had 4D av., which is certainly

forcing, so if 6D makes, the failure to reach it, would be the 5D bid.

 

And I would have bid 3D instead of 2D.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[kfay]

The auction doesn't sound like one where we should be bidding, but then what has partner got?  xx x KJxxxx KJxx?

 

We'd have bid this way with an ace less and a 2542 shape.  That adds up to siginficant extra values.  I'd bid six.

If partner held this hand he'd bid 4♣, not 5♦.

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...5116&hl=auction

[neilkaz]

I have to ask the OP a couple questions to hopefully make my decision whether to carry on to 6♦ a bit less of a guess.

 

1) What would a 4♣ rebid from PD mean?

 

2) What would a 4♦ rebid from PD mean?

 

Also I wonder why PD won't play 2♠ as showing a good minor suit raise. I thought this "impossible 2♠ bid" was a routine component of forcing NT bidding. Anyhow what meaning does PD want for the 2♠ rebid on a sequence like this? Perhaps PD wants to use 2♠ as a stopper ask?

 

.. neilkaz ..

[hrothgar]

I think that Pooltuna raises a critical point:

 

This is MP and you have enough extra strength that 3NT should make.

You could easily be losing out to the 3N bidders.

 

I'm bidding 6♦

[kfay]

I think that Pooltuna raises a critical point:

 

This is MP and you have enough extra strength that 3NT should make.

You could easily be losing out to the 3N bidders.

 

I'm bidding 6♦

I really don't see any evidence for this argument.

 

We also might be in the top spot?

[MFA]

I would try 6. Based on my values - not really because it is mp. Playing in diamonds and not notrumps looks right when partner insists. With high card strength in both black suits he should often bid 3NT instead of 5♦.

 

He must have some useful values or it would be a little silly to bid so high in an uncontested auction.

[Little Kid]

I have to ask the OP a couple questions to hopefully make my decision whether to carry on to 6♦ a bit less of a guess.

 

1) What would a 4♣ rebid from PD mean?

 

2) What would a 4♦ rebid from PD mean?

 

Also I wonder why PD won't play 2♠ as showing a good minor suit raise. I thought this "impossible 2♠ bid" was a routine component of forcing NT bidding. Anyhow what meaning does PD want for the 2♠ rebid on a sequence like this? Perhaps PD wants to use 2♠ as a stopper ask?

 

.. neilkaz ..

Partner is of the "bid what we can make" school without giving too much info to the opponents. 4♣ and 4♦ would be splinters but I don't think not bidding either of them denies a shortage. It makes sense that 2♠ is a ♦ raise but we don't have firm agreements and am sure he would not bid it before agreeing it.

[Phil]

6♦.

 

Partner is bidding to make. So am I.

[whereagles]

I bid 6♦. Come on, I could have had instead assorted junk on min hand.

[neilkaz]

OK, I'll carry on to 6♦ also based on what the OP has said about partner and based on it being MP and that if 3NT takes 10 tricks or more 5♦ scores badly anyhow.

 

I do have a clearly better hand than the min I could hold and hopefully 6♦ is at least 50/50.

[nigel_k]

Pass.

 

We're green and this is a preempt not a limit bid. Partner could have:

 

xxx

x

KJxxxx

Jxx

 

If he has the ♣K instead of the ♣J he might bid the same way and slam is decent but certainly not laydown. However 3NT is hopeless in either case and the number of people in this forum who seem sad to have bypassed 3NT suggests to me we will get plenty of matchpoints for making 5♦ with or without an overtrick.

[Phil]

We're green and this is a preempt not a limit bid. Partner could have:

 

xxx

x

KJxxxx

Jxx

Seriously, why would he bid 5♦ with this? Surely he cannot expect to make 11 tricks and there is no reason to preempt the opponents at this stage.

[gnasher]

The auction doesn't sound like one where we should be bidding, but then what has partner got?  xx x KJxxxx KJxx?

 

We'd have bid this way with an ace less and a 2542 shape.  That adds up to siginficant extra values.  I'd bid six.

If partner held this hand he'd bid 4♣, not 5♦.

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...5116&hl=auction

Ok, I've looked through that thread, and I can't find anyone who thinks that 4♣ shows a hand like the one I quoted. Here are some examples of what was suggested:

 

Josh suggested xx x Kxxxxx AQJx

Justin agreed with Josh

Ken suggested something that I don't understand

The Hog suggested x xx Kxxx AQJxxx

[gnasher]

xxx

x

KJxxxx

Jxx

 

If he has the ♣K instead of the ♣J he might bid the same way and slam is decent but certainly not laydown.

It's not a claimer at trick one, but it's close. OK, it goes down the 6% of the time that they can get a club ruff, and there's a risk of misguessing when trumps are 3-0 and one of the majors is something-1, but it's still well over 90%.

[neilkaz]

We're green and this is a preempt not a limit bid. Partner could have:

 

xxx

x

KJxxxx

Jxx

Seriously, why would he bid 5♦ with this? Surely he cannot expect to make 11 tricks and there is no reason to preempt the opponents at this stage.

This looks like a routine raise to 3♦ here. Opener can have a 2542 11 count.