High enough or try for more ?

[sathyab]

[hv=pc=n&s=s76ha83dj84caqt72&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=pp1sp1np4sp5c]133|200[/hv] IMPs

 

New partnership, no agreements such as Namyats.

[rhm]

I would call it hyper aggressive.

Partner needs solid spades plus a control in ♦.

Even then you will likely need the ♣ finesse. Clearly against the odds and the five level is not safe in spite of the good hand.

One of my pet peeves in bidding are that one player skips several levels of bidding and jumps to game, saying I know where I want to play and how high, only to get overruled by a limited partner.

I am not saying partner should always pass. But he needs a very good reason. Holding a good hand is not one of them.

Holding an extraordinary hand, partner could not possibly anticipate might be one.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gwnn]

If no agreements, I wouldn't take it as strong, and I'd pass. Some people play this as strong 2 and some others play it as a 4♠ opener with an extra king, and when we have 11 points, the second possibility is more likely.

[Free]

I'd like to vote "nuts/coocoo/noobish" because we pass an opening hand and later on push partner to the 5-level.

[whereagles]

This depends on whether you agreed with pard to bid like this on

 

AKQxxxx

xx

Ax

xx

 

or

 

AKQxxxx

xx

Ax

Kx

 

In the first case you're probably better off passing. In the second, you should try for 7 :)

[rhm]

This depends on whether you agreed with pard to bid like this on

 

AKQxxxx

xx

Ax

xx

 

or

 

AKQxxxx

xx

Ax

Kx

 

In the first case you're probably better off passing. In the second, you should try for 7 :)

 

Since when does a rebid of 4♠ guarantee a solid suit?

And if he does have a solid suit, why does he need the ace of ♦ for his 4♠ rebid?

And if he does have a solid suit and the ace of ♦ why does he need a side king?

And if he does have one of three missing side king, why does it have to be in ♣?

 

Just learn never to play your partner for perfect cards. He (almost) never has them

 

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

What's the matter with you? Can't you read between the lines? The hands I showed merely illustrate the main question: does a 1M-1x-4M rebid show 1 or 2 side features?

[quiddity]

One of my pet peeves in bidding are that one player skips several levels of bidding and jumps to game, saying I know where I want to play and how high, only to get overruled by a limited partner.

 

I don't think it applies here. The 4♠ bidder is the one who is limiting his hand - he has a one-suiter, too good for a 4♠ opening, stronger than a 3♠ rebid, and too weak for a 2♣ opening. Maybe 18-20 with at least semi-solid spades? By contrast the 1NT bidder has a huge range of shapes and strengths.

 

But I agree that moving past 4♠ with this hand is agressive.

[mtvesuvius]

I would have opened this, not playing catchup now though. I'd say somewhere between Totally against odds and Hyper Aggressive.

[gwnn]

I don't think it applies here. The 4♠ bidder is the one who is limiting his hand - in my partnership he has a one-suiter, too good for a 4♠ opening, stronger than a 3♠ rebid, and too weak for a 2♣ opening. Maybe 18-20 with at least semi-solid spades? By contrast the 1NT bidder has a huge range of shapes and strengths.

 

But I agree that moving past 4♠ with this hand is agressive.

fixed your post.

[quiddity]

fixed your post.

 

:)

Sure.. But based on the OP ("new partnership, no agreements") this is what I would expect.

[pooltuna]

I would call it hyper aggressive.

Partner needs solid spades plus a control in ♦.

Even then you will likely need the ♣ finesse. Clearly against the odds and the five level is not safe in spite of the good hand.

One of my pet peeves in bidding are that one player skips several levels of bidding and jumps to game, saying I know where I want to play and how high, only to get overruled by a limited partner.

I am not saying partner should always pass. But he needs a very good reason. Holding a good hand is not one of them.

Holding an extraordinary hand, partner could not possibly anticipate might be one.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

This can be hyper aggressive only if you have an agreement (sanely) "no new suits at the 5 level" and consequently 5♣ must be a ♣ control

[ahydra]

I generally use 3NT rebid to show a solid suit, so this should show non-solid spades with a good chunk of points and 4 losers (or good 5), perhaps

 

AQJ10xxx

Kx

Ax

Kx

 

That hand makes for an OK slam (finesse or non-diamond lead). Other combinations eg AK diamonds but xx clubs still make for 50% slams so I'd say it's worth bidding on at pairs - not sure about teams though, particularly if partner might only have 6 spades.

 

ahydra