5-level alternatives

[Flem72]

One of the things that distinguishes really experienced/excellent players from the rest of us yahoos (feel free to think of yourself as a non-yahoo) is the ability to figure out the 5 level, especially when the auction gets there quickly. Nevertheless, I think that very many of these decisions are either/or decisons in the sense that one call will cater to one kind of hand from partner and another will cater to another. So:

 

Playing a SNT system, after partner's first seat opener, IMPs, both not, it goes 1C-4S to you and you're looking at

 

void

AKTxxx

AQJx

Kxx.

 

What alternatives, what do they signify and what do they risk?

 

Regards and Happy Trails,

 

Scott Needham

Boulder, Colorado, USA

[Phil]

Tough problem.

 

With so much playing strength, I am driving to 6. I will pay off to the odd hand where partner has two spade honors and we have some slow losers. If partner has one spade card, its extremely difficult to find a hand where slam is bad.

 

Here are some options:

 

- 5♥ is clearly non-forcing. I would make this call with a long heart suit and short spades

 

- In another thread, we discussed 1N - 4♥ - 5♥, and the logical answer was spades + a minor. In this auction, 5♠ seems to be a grand slam try showing short spades with great club support. Perhaps that isn't best.

 

- 4N is "two places to play". I would make this call with four clubs and 5/6 of a red suit, or with 5-5 in the red suits. Generally, when we pull 5m to 5♥, this cancels the two-places meaning and simply says, I have a good hand with hearts. What is 5N over 5m? If it tries to bring hearts into focus, thats a sensible way to bid this, but I wouldn't be comfortable. Similarly, what is 5♠ over 5m?

 

At the table, I'd settle for a practical 6♥, and not try to wrangle with all of these issues.

[Yu18772]

I would bid ♥ - I dont want to partner to play it, because a lead through Kxx♣ would not be helpful, and I dont want to pool partners 5♦ to 5♥ because I dont like the hand that much (K♣ doesnt seem to be a good card)

 

5 or 6?

5 is not forcing, but its not a weak preemptive hand either (not x, AKxxxxxx,xxx,xxx)

6 is tempting, but I need specific cards or very good distribution from p to make, while if I need to finesse its likely to be off, and the distributions are not going to be friendly.

so 5 for me.......yahoo http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif

[ahydra]

6H for me. Agree with pretty much all of Phil's reasoning.

 

ahydra

[MrAce]

I would bid ♥ - I dont want to partner to play it, because a lead through Kxx♣ would not be helpful, and I dont want to pool partners 5♦ to 5♥ because I dont like the hand that much (K♣ doesnt seem to be a good card)

 

5 or 6?

5 is not forcing, but its not a weak preemptive hand either (not x, AKxxxxxx,xxx,xxx)

 

 

You have 15 cards, if you reduce it to 13 while keeping your AKxxxxxx suit it looks much better and i cant think of anyone who would just pass with a AK 8th card suit just because it aint good enough.

[Flameous]

I'd sort of like to get partner to declare this, as I'd hate to hear 4S bidder lightner double 6H.

However I have no better agreements in place here than Phil, so can't make it happen. Thus simple 6H must do.

But if someone actually has some agreements in place for this kind of place, I'd like to hear it.

 

I think direct 5NT would be choice of slams according to our agreements, but I'm not really sure what kind of hand that promises. At least if my 6th heart was a club, it would seem right.

[han]

I agree that it is right to drive to slam. You could try 4NT and bid 5NT if partner picks 5C. If partner then bids 6C then I'd pass, apparently he has a serious preference for clubs. If he bids 6D I'd correct to 6H.

 

If partner bids 5D then maybe it is right to bid 5S and try for a grand.

[Gerben42]

The plan 4NT then 5♥ shows an invite in ♥, but I think this hand should ask partner to pick a slam.

[Fluffy]

Imposing this heart suit when RHO preempted is not something I;d really enjoy. I think han's approach is sound.

[Zelandakh]

Imposing this heart suit when RHO preempted is not something I;d really enjoy. I think han's approach is sound.

Did you not say that you played 4NT in this auction as RKCB though, Fluffy? Admittedly that was a year or so ago so either my memory might be wrong or your agreements might have changed in the meantime. For me, 1C - (4S) - 4NT is general take-out rather than specifically 2 places and I think this is clearly the first step. I agree that han's approach looks highly sensible providing the agreements for 4NT and 5NT match the hand.

[Phil]

If partner bids 5D then maybe it is right to bid 5S and try for a grand.

 

The problem I see with getting excited over 5♦, is what would partner bid with a boring 4=3=3=3 over 4N?

 

Or even 3=4=3=3??

[Phil]

6 is tempting, but I need specific cards or very good distribution from p to make, while if I need to finesse its likely to be off, and the distributions are not going to be friendly.

 

I think if you go to the exercise of putting together hands for partner, its very tough to find ones where slam isn't excellent.

[han]

The problem I see with getting excited over 5♦, is what would partner bid with a boring 4=3=3=3 over 4N?

 

Or even 3=4=3=3??

 

Oh I agree, we might still be in the wrong strain after 5D.

[gnasher]

- 4N is "two places to play". I would make this call with four clubs and 5/6 of a red suit, or with 5-5 in the red suits. Generally, when we pull 5m to 5♥, this cancels the two-places meaning and simply says, I have a good hand with hearts.

Only if you're converting 5♣ to 5♥. If you bid 5♥ over 5♦, that just shows x5x4 or something similar.

 

What is 5N over 5m? If it tries to bring hearts into focus, thats a sensible way to bid this, but I wouldn't be comfortable. Similarly, what is 5♠ over 5m?

To me they both sound like grand-slam tries for the minor, but I agree that on this hand it would be nice to be able to reintroduce hearts.

[gnasher]

I'd bid 4NT, then raise 5♣ to 6♣, or bid 6♥ over 5♦.

[Fluffy]

Did you not say that you played 4NT in this auction as RKCB though, Fluffy? Admittedly that was a year or so ago so either my memory might be wrong or your agreements might have changed in the meantime. For me, 1C - (4S) - 4NT is general take-out rather than specifically 2 places and I think this is clearly the first step. I agree that han's approach looks highly sensible providing the agreements for 4NT and 5NT match the hand.

No, you are right, with one of my regular partners I'd be stuck with no bid, even double comes to mind as even 5NT is grand slam force for us, doesn-t make much sense I know.