To bid or not to bid

[PeterE]

[hv=d=s&s=saxxxxhakqxdaxxcx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

With Blue Club as the system and w/o opponents interfering the bidding goes:

 

South           North

1 ♣ (17+)      1 ♠ (exactly 3 controls, A=2, K=1)

2 ♠ (nat)       3 ♠ (nat, positiv)

4 ♠ (nat)       5 ♣ (Cue)

5 ♦ (Cue)       ...5 ♠ (undisputed huddle)

6 ♠                 pass

 

Declarer makes 13 tricks.

 

If you were called after the board what would you decide?

[jdonn]

Passing 5♠ is NOT an LA! If I had to guess the contract directly at that point I might bid 7♠, and surely am still trying for a grand. I didn't cuebid over 3♠ with a very slam suitable minimum, yet partner bid 5♣ all on his own! And I have 3 aces and nothing but top tricks! What I really want is 5NT now to be GSF, that would simplify things.

 

Sorry I'll take a deep breath... seriously what can partner have where slam isn't good where I bid 4♠ without even cuebidding, when cuebidding would have been very easy and convenient, and he then forces us to the 5 level on his own? Please no examples with bad trumps, he doesn't have that!

[bluejak]

I wonder if you could argue that bidding 6♠ rather than 7♠ is suggested by the BIT? B)

[jdonn]

You could, but since 7♠ made I won't worry about it!

[Cascade]

agree with jdonn.

[blackshoe]

It hesitated. I'm not shooting it. ;)

[peachy]

I don't know Blue Club system in general nor the system of the bidders. What is the difference between 3S and 4S by responder, in the given auction where responder bid 3S? Is 3S stronger than 4S, meaning that it has stuff outside the promised controls. Does 3S promise four card support? Is either of those promising/denying a balanced hand?

 

Anyway, it does not much matter. Even without answer to these and related questions, Pass on 5S is not a LA. After responder started the slam investigation with 5C cue, opener must never stop below 6S with the given hand.

[PeterE]

4 ♠ says only support - nothing more to add - whereupon 3 ♠ shows (at least) mild slam interest. I have no idea whether is shows 4 card support, but others (outside this thread) are sure it does not have Qxx.

[peachy]

4 ♠ says only support - nothing more to add - whereupon 3 ♠ shows (at least) mild slam interest. I have no idea whether is shows 4 card support, but others (outside this thread) are sure it does not have Qxx.

Out of curiosity, I went to visit another forum since you sort of implied this problem was discussed also elsewhere. And found it. I must say the opinions over there are completely off the wall! LOL

[PeterE]

Those are not opinions (by that one idiot poster) but the normal sort of response you receive, when you try to get a useful answer to a problem ... :ph34r: :( :angry: :angry:

[cherdanno]

I think it will be difficult to find peers for a poll here. 4S???? Sounds like someone who plays Blue Club because he thinks he won't need judgment then. I still don't see passing 5S as a logical alternative.

[Codo]

I want to reopen a dead thread and disagree.

 

Partner had shown 3 controls so far. And you dream of a grand slam? Yes this is possible, but how to bid it after this start of the auction?

 

And:

Why can't he hold: xxx,xx,KQJx,AQJx? Surely worth a move above 4 Spade?

(You showed 5 spades by your 2 Spade bid)

 

Another question: 5 ♣ is looking for a slam. So, what are you looking for? Is the goal the grand slam? Okay, but how to bid it after 5 ♦?

 

Or is your goal the small slam? If so, why don't you bid it if this is obvious? Why did you bid 5 ♦ and not 6 ♠ if this is so obvious?

Which answer had changed your view about whether to play 5 / 6 or 7 spades?

 

I think the player had not been sure. He dreamt when he found the 4 ♠ bid and he still dreamt when he bid 5 ♦. The huddle woke him up. He may or may not had been woken up before and without the huddle. But I think that the huddle may well provide information that the spades are better then shown so far, so I would correct the score.

[mrdct]

If you were called after the board what would you decide?

Putting the suboptimal 4♠ bid to one side, the first thing I would do is establish the meaning of 5♣. Is it slam forcing? If not, then does 5♦ create a slam force in their methods? If after proper investigation I conclude that 5♠ was non-forcing, I then consider what the hesitation suggests. I probably need to establish what their cue-bidding methods are too. It looks like North was probably worried about his lack of ♥ control and had a hand that wanted to push-on beyond 5♠ but didn't feel he had quite enough to do so. But South has the benefit of looking at his own hand and when he runs the various simulations in his head 6♠ surely comes out on top and pass does not look like a logical alternative.

[jallerton]

This case needs more investigation before we can give a definitive answer.

 

We need to ask Opener:

 

1. What did 4♠ mean and why did you bid it?

 

2. What did 5♣ mean?

 

3. What did 5♦ mean and why did you bid it?

 

Remember, we need to consider the logical alternatives for a player who thought that it was correct to bid 4♠ and then 5♦. If polling players, we should exclude the results from people who thought it was correct to play in 6♠ as soon as partner had moved with 5♣ as those players would not (or at least should not) have bid 5♦.

 

I've never played Blue Club, but I would have though the most logical interpretation of the space-consuming 4♠ bid would be: "I don't think we have enough controls for slam" and hence 5♣ shows interest in slam despite the fact that the partnership is missing a few high card controls, i.e. 5♣ implies a shortage and/or a source of tricks in a side suit.