CSGibson Posted July 7, 2010 Report Share Posted July 7, 2010 [hv=d=n&v=n&s=sjtxxhadjxca98xxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP1♦-(1♠)-2♣-(2♥),4♣-(4♥)-5♣-(5♥),5♠-(p)-5N-(6♥),X-(p)-?[/hv] 4♣ was forcing in this auction, 5N was a general grand slam try. Passing 6♥ would have shown first round control, so X was merely denying a ♥ void or the ♥ ace. 1. Do you agree with South's auction to this point?2. Would you push to 7, or sit for the X? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted July 7, 2010 Report Share Posted July 7, 2010 7♣, partner sounded keen and I don't think we are getting rich against 6♥X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted July 8, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 8, 2010 Partner has:[hv=s=saxhtdakqxxckqxxx]133|100|[/hv]. Diamonds are 5-1, though, with no sqeeze emerging. Down 1 in 7♣, we would have taken 6♥ for 500, taking our 4 aces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted July 8, 2010 Report Share Posted July 8, 2010 What was 5♣? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted July 8, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 8, 2010 What was 5♣? 5♣ was not conventional, though we would have been in a forcing pass situation, so it should show some offensive potential, without having so much as to cue 4♠ or make an ambiguous 4N call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted July 8, 2010 Report Share Posted July 8, 2010 I bid 7♣ instead of 5NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted July 8, 2010 Report Share Posted July 8, 2010 I bid 7♣ instead of 5NT. Me too. Partner's made a grand-slam try opposite a signoff in 5♣. He can't have anything less than what he actually had. 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.