Good choice? Good result?

[aguahombre]

Hmm, thought sure he won something back in '90 or so.

[rduran1216]

Does partner's hand rate to have a void in diamonds in this sequence, since we don't have any exclusion type agreements?

 

If so how weak could he be? Can you construct a hand where 7S will have < 50% chance given my hand and this sequence. And for those hands, how likely is it that 6NT makes just as easily as 6S?

 

if this kind of consideration isn't practical or useful, fine. But I start by assuming my partner isn't taking a chance on 6S, since we had about 75% up to that point.

[kayin801]

Does partner's hand rate to have a void in diamonds in this sequence, since we don't have any exclusion type agreements?

 

If so how weak could he be? Can you construct a hand where 7S will have < 50% chance given my hand and this sequence. And for those hands, how likely is it that 6NT makes just as easily as 6S?

 

if this kind of consideration isn't practical or useful, fine. But I start by assuming my partner isn't taking a chance on 6S, since we had about 75% up to that point.

 

I think most people are suggesting the diamond void because it's our longest suit and this auction smells like a void, so odds are that partner's void is in diamonds. Furthermore partner could have texased and asked for key cards, so that also seems to hint at a void to me, especially if we have no exclusion agreements. I think this is a decent MP tactical bid on partner's side, because say that partner has a diamond void, maybe LHO will try cashing the diamond A at trick 1 and we will have an easy route to 13 tricks after that, beating all those who showed their diamond void en route to 6♠.

 

Of course, any time partner's void isn't in diamonds AND he doesn't have the diamond A, 7♠ has a 0% chance of making :) Since partner has left us no intelligent way to check for where his void is, we will look like complete fools if the previous scenario comes to pass. I think with solid spades and an outside A, or a void plus some goodies, partner might make this bid. An example hand for partner has AKQJxx, QJx, -, Qxxx, where 7 doesn't look like much fun at all but 6 has a lot of chances.

 

I think most posters here also have the meta agreement "when my partner quadruple jumps to slam after I've made a limited bid, that's a signoff." Which tends to be healthy. (Edit: Even with the Texas inferences here, though if you agree as Chris has it could be right)

 

(I think there was an interesting thread a while back about an auction that went 1NT-6NT and opener had 4 bullets and a 5 card diamond suit and we were wondering if we should raise to 7. Maybe vaguely related?)

[Free]

rduran1216, you're thinking too much. :P

[Fluffy]

so what was the real hand? did you berate partner for his 6♠ bid after you raised?

[rduran1216]

so what was the real hand? did you berate partner for his 6♠ bid after you raised?

 

P hand is AKQxxxx KQx - Jxx

[peachy]

6S was a momma-poppa gamble. A grandmaster who knows what he is doing (does he really) would likely take a slower route and investigate, if a conversion was to be considered. Pass is 100% normal.

[cherdano]

Did partner not have a diamond splinter available? There is no way that partner can know the correct level when he has a diamond void - either his hand is good enough to bid 7 opposite ♦xxxx, or it's not good enough to make 6 opposite ♦KJ. Case in point, not trying for 7 with his actual hand is pretty ridiculous.

[MrAce]

That's what 1NT-2♥;2♠-5NT shows.

 

Not everyone plays it this way, and if my friend Gnasher was here he would say "Only those who plays it this way assumes everyone else plays it this way" :P Some still play this as Josephine with void and cant RKCB, some plays this as COS as u suggested some plays it invitation to slam or gs....But almost every pair plays TEXAS or equivalent high level xfers with long trumps...

 

Seriously, it really matters here if the pair is also playing TEXAS (or alike) xfers. If they do, this 6♠ without agreement is asking pd to correct it if not have fit as oppose to most people's opinions here. If he really wanted to play only and only 6♠ he should have started with TEXAS and then bid 6♠.

 

Without Texas i would pass this 6♠ and if we agreed on Texas i would correct it to 6 NT.