ATB

[Fluffy]

[hv=pc=n&w=st2h92dacakt87532&e=sa73hak53dq7642cq&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2c(11-15%205+%20unbal%20%5Bno%204d%5D)2sdp5cppp]266|200[/hv]

[karlson]

I blame East 100%. What did he think West had? If west had only 7 clubs, then he's probably 7-4, which would be just fine too.

 

Perhaps West could have bid more slowly, but I'm not convinced it would have led to a perfect auction.

[mikeh]

Both

 

West consumed a huge amount of bidding space to make a call that wasn't understood by partner, and so, imo, has to wear some responsibility...maybe we can start calling these problems ATR..assess the responsibility rather than the semantically loaded 'blame'.

 

Digressing for a moment, I often find myself thinking, in these ATB posts, that there really isn't a lot of 'blame' to go around, but that one partner's choice played more heavily in the outcome than did the other's.

 

Here, I think bidding 3♠ then pulling 4♣ is a better approach...unless for this partnership that sequence would promise a spade control.

 

Having said that, East seems to have sat there like a deer in the headlights when 5♣ came around to him. It isn't just that he had more than he promised....it's what he had 'more' that counts. He has the club Q....forget partner holding 8 clubs....imagine he holds 7...the club Q has to be huge. He has 5 controls!

 

In essence he appears to have 4 important working cards on an auction on which partner could reliably hope for perhaps two and on a good day, three.

 

He can't count tricks...and we usually like to count tricks for slam....but he can reason that his partner expects to make 11 tricks opposite a significantly less helpful hand than this, so 12 has to have play.

 

So I 'blame' West a little bit but I place almost all the responsibility on East. he could and should have bid slam, while W could and maybe should have taken a less direct approach, but who is to say that the slower appraoch would have worked with this East?

[Hanoi5]

East 99%

[Flameous]

I think west shows a hand that would want to pre-empt 5 clubs, but has too much defence for it. Well here east has everything covered, he can count partner to have either AAK or AKK and it doesn't matter at all in which suits they are, 6 should be a good contract.

[hotShot]

The diagram shows non vul. all and if the scoring was IMPs, partner could risk going down 3 as -500/-420 is nothing to worry to much about.

 

West 5♣ is a "Hail Mary Pass" and East did not catch it. West is to blame for a bad pass and East gets the blame for a bad catch.

 

Both are to blame.

[Poky]

West 100%.

Not bidding 3♠ with an almost 4 loser hand to set-up a game force and investigating slam is an unforgivable error.

After ...3♠-3NT-4♣.. things are much easier.

[JLOGIC]

How many reasonable constructions can you guys come up with where slam is bad from easts point of view that wast would rebid 5C with? It's very difficult.

[Phil]

East gets most of it. I would be considering 7 with that mitt.

 

5♣ has to mean something! If you were to give the auction to a Precision player and asked what 5♣ would be, you'd probably get an answer like "7-8 good clubs and an outside control or two". Maybe the West hand is a little too prime for the call, but it isn't far off.

 

East 90, West 10.

[whereagles]

I wouldn't blame anyone. 5♣ seems reasonable and bidding over it might very well run into a doubleton diamond.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&w=st2h92dacakt87532&e=sa73hak53dq7642cq&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2c(11-15%205+%20unbal%20%5Bno%204d%5D)2sdp5cppp]266|200[/hv]

East if anybody.

2♣ (Precison) is fine. West's 5♣ is reasonable.

Over 5♣, with three QT and ♣Q, 6♣ by East is a fair gamble.