Raising with 5 trumps...

[mgoetze]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj543h94dkt4c975&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1sp]133|200[/hv]

 

Partner's 1♠ showed 5 spades, 11-21 points.

Your options:

 

2♣ Invitational with 3 spades / GF with clubs / GF balanced

2♠ 6-9 with 3+ spades

2NT Invitational+ with 4+ spades

3♠ preemptive raise (0-5)

4♠ undefined

[TylerE]

Looks like a 4♠ bid to me. Pretty hard to come up with hands where we're missing slam and partner's only opening♠. Will you miss a slam occasionally? Sure, but on a hand like this I'd much rather be in 4+2 than 2+2...

[aguahombre]

If we decide to bid 4 because we have 10 trumps, there is one more option:

 

Forcing NT, then 4S to suggest "mixed" with 5 pieces. If partner doesn't rebid 2y, you don't care and will bid 4S anyway.

 

This would allow 4S to be "defined" as a true preempt.

[TylerE]

If we decide to bid 4 because we have 10 trumps, there is one more option:

 

Forcing NT, then 4S to suggest "mixed" with 5 pieces. If partner doesn't rebid 2y, you don't care and will bid 4S anyway.

 

This would allow 4S to be "defined" as a true preempt.

 

You're assuming 1NT is forcing. With such an oddball raise structure, why are you assuming that?

[mgoetze]

You're assuming 1NT is forcing. With such an oddball raise structure, why are you assuming that?

 

Is it oddball, really? :) But indeed we do not play forcing 1NT.

[TylerE]

Is it oddball, really? :) But indeed we do not play forcing 1NT.

 

Well, to these american eyes, yea.

 

The 2♣ bid would be flat out illegal.

2NT is played as GF.

The preemptive raise to 3 is a bit more common, but still in the minority.

 

Note: I didn't really meany anything *negative*, but it's really different from typical 2/1.

[mike777]

4s easy

[awm]

I'd bid 2NT. There are several problems with 4♠ (which I expect to be the other popular option). This hand has substantial defense (♠A+♦K) which suggest we do not need to be preempting in order to keep opponents from bidding. This hand is also quite flat, suggesting that 4♠ may not make as often opposite a minimum opening bid as we would like; the fifth trump is worth something but not that much with no ruffing values to speak of. Finally, this hand has enough values that we might make slam opposite the right hand (as little as ♠Kxxxx ♥AKxxx ♦Ax ♣x and slam is excellent). All of these point towards showing a 4(+?) card limit raise and allowing partner to make an appropriate decision.

[rogerclee]

I agree with awm.

[helene_t]

I play this structure also with Shogi, I think it is pretty much standard in the Netherlands and other civilizedoddball countries, but I am not 100% comfortable with it. The problem is that 2♠ and 3♠ show approximately the same playing strength while there isn't a mixed 4-card raise. Some people have Bergen raises also which this hand is perfect for. I bid 2NT with this hand but would prefer that bid to show slightly more.

 

Btw I would never bid a forcing 1NT with 5-card support. Maybe I would psyche a 1NT response with a yarb with 5-card support if I didn't have a preemptive 3-level raise and weren't brave enough for 4♠. But to me, 1NT followed by 4♠ shows a 3-card limit raise that got upgraded after hearing opener's rebid.

[gwnn]

2NT should work fine here. definitely better than the other bids

[ggwhiz]

I agree with awm.

 

Me too and if partner bids 3♠ I'm passing. You imply that you open a lot of 11's after all.

 

I would need a singleton somewhere to blast 4♠ and find it curious that all other bids are so well defined and 4♠ not at all.

[mgoetze]

Me too and if partner bids 3♠ I'm passing. You imply that you open a lot of 11's after all.

 

I would need a singleton somewhere to blast 4♠ and find it curious that all other bids are so well defined and 4♠ not at all.

 

Passing a forcing bid is not a good idea in my book. ;)

I would say we open about 50% of 11s. Well, I do anyway, partner perhaps a bit less.

 

What would you recommend as a definition for our 4♠ bid?

[JLOGIC]

Showing a limit raise is normal to me. That is what our hand is worth. 5332 is not a 4S bid, especially with good defense.

[mike777]

fwiw I thought my hand worth less than a limit raise so I bid 4s given i cannot bid 3c bergen.

[mgoetze]

OK, so apparently I underbid this one at 2♠. shame on me.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would sell the hand as an inv. raise, i.e. 2NT - but dont mind a 4S call.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

Looks like a 4♠ bid to me. Pretty hard to come up with hands where we're missing slam and partner's only opening♠. Will you miss a slam occasionally? Sure, but on a hand like this I'd much rather be in 4+2 than 2+2...

You don't have a very good imagination then, partner's hand doesn't even need to be very good.

 

Kxxxxx, Axxxx, Ax, void or Kxxxxx, x, AQxxxx, void is plenty.

 

With that raise structure I'd bid 4♠, but I'd prefer to play almost anything else.

[TylerE]

Those hands are pretty unlikely though. Like is said, this is hand type where missing a cold game is a much bigger worry than getting to a distributional hand.

[Fluffy]

don't raise to 4 with 5332, it works poorly.

 

I would bid a solid 2♠ 8-10 if avaible, close to invitational 2NT. If your structure doesn't have a sound raise avaible then 2NT is probably best.

[Cyberyeti]

don't raise to 4 with 5332, it works poorly.

 

I would bid a solid 2♠ 8-10 if avaible, close to invitational 2NT. If your structure doesn't have a sound raise avaible then 2NT is probably best.

I agree in principle, but of the choices available it seemed best. You need a bid for "not quite a 2N" and the system played doesn't have one.

 

At this vul 4♠ can also gain when partner has a poor hand, as it will be difficult for opps to enter the auction, and you'll most likely just drift off undoubled if opps were making something.

[gwnn]

Don't bid 2♠ on 5!!!!

[billw55]

You don't have a very good imagination then, partner's hand doesn't even need to be very good.

 

Kxxxxx, Axxxx, Ax, void or Kxxxxx, x, AQxxxx, void is plenty.

er ... lol? Partner's hand doesn't need to be very good, only 66 or 65 with a void?

 

Anyway, I agree with a 4 card limit raise, by whatever means available.

 

Lastly why is 1♠-4♠ undefined? Seems like a fairly routine and useful bid.

[mgoetze]

Lastly why is 1♠-4♠ undefined? Seems like a fairly routine and useful bid.

 

We never got around to it, and as mentioned upthread, useful suggestions are welcome.

[cherdano]

Lastly why is 1♠-4♠ undefined? Seems like a fairly routine and useful bid.

 

 

We never got around to it, and as mentioned upthread, useful suggestions are welcome.

It's impractical (and, actually, quite bad) to forget everything you ever learned about bridge when forming a new partnership. Unless there is a reason not to, you should assume that bids with standard meanings also have the same meaning in your partnership.

The standard meaning of 4♠ is preemptive - typically 5 trumps, but 4-card support with a void certainly qualifies. Strength is typically defined as "one useful feature" - good trumps, ruffing value, a control.

 

Of course it's better to fine tune this agreement (i.e. the exact range), but it's much better to assume the standard meaning than to leave the bid undefined.