High-level decision

[paulg]

I was running a practice session for some of the Lille pairs on high-level bidding and the following came up (this is one way of saying it is not a laws case):

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saqj82hkq85dk864c&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1s3c(weak)4s5c]200|300[/hv]

 

Despite the unfavourable vulnerability this is not a forcing pass situation for me nor for most of the pairs bidding the hand (direct raises never create a forcing pass), but if it is for you there is the option in the poll. Your call?

[dake50]

Expect partner to have red A + D-QJ + S-K-5th?

Nope.! He could have shown useful stuff.

He's still there.

Even 5S isn't sure.

I want 5S in front of partner to ask 6S with

that much outside of clubs.

I would, conversely, consider blasting 6S hoping

they often 7C sac right or wrong - an interesting

gamble to keep opponents unsure on other auctions.

[Fluffy]

there are perfect hands with ♦Ax out there that make slam, but they should be unexpected, 5♠ onm the other hand looks like a far bet, I'd try that.

[phil_20686]

Ill bid 5H. I am not hugely optimistic, but sometimes partner will bid 5S on a pretty decent hand like Kxxxx Axx x xxxx here, its not like he will be super keen to raise to slam with no aces.

 

This might be too much, would not criticise 5S.

 

You do need to bid though I think. I would not defend 5c or 5cx.

[Phil]

Ill bid 5H. I am not hugely optimistic, but sometimes partner will bid 5S on a pretty decent hand like Kxxxx Axx x xxxx here, its not like he will be super keen to raise to slam with no aces.

 

This might be too much, would not criticise 5S.

 

You do need to bid though I think. I would not defend 5c or 5cx.

 

I don't thiink a slam try is out of the question at all. Partner is probably short in a red suit, and 4♠ is not a preempt.

 

I prefer 5♦ since it gives partner room for last train.

[gnasher]

Partner would bid 4♠ with a normal limit raise to 3♠, so 5♦ seems sensible. If he bids 5♥ I'll sign off, because I could be a lot better than this.

[fromageGB]

Partner could have shown a spade game based on controls/values, but this shows a game based just on 5 spades and little in the way of controls. Slam is very unlikely, therefore, but 5♠ doesn't need much, and X is losing to an uninterrupted 4♠.

5♠

[Yu18772]

I think that partner is not distributional 5 card spade "nothing useful" type of hand. Bidding 4♠ with Kxxx, Ax, QJxx, xxx at bad vulnerability seems completely normal to me - he is bidding what he thinks you make, based on minmal opening. If anything partner is marked with 2-3 clubs and E is unlimited yet, and still made the raise, so real values seems logical.

If pass is not forcing I would definitely want to bid - to beat 5♣ 4 down means that they dont have anything outside ♣, meaning that we have ice cold slam, in my worst scenario it may even go pass pass pass..... 2 down. In any case - I dont think we may let them play this, so like Phil - 5♦ for me, and 5♠ over 5♥. If pass is forcing I would consider pass (assuming its the extras type of hand) and would have hard time sitting for the double if that would be partners choice.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

[paulg]

Thanks everyone. As it happens in this case it was a slam hand (partner held 10xxx - Axxxxx xxx) but the discussion focused on what double show mean here. Clearly you are not doubling on clubs so isn't this hand suitable?

[gnasher]

Thanks everyone. As it happens in this case it was a slam hand (partner held 10xxx - Axxxxx xxx) but the discussion focused on what double show mean here. Clearly you are not doubling on clubs so isn't this hand suitable?

I think the double should be for penalties. The fact that you're unlikely to have a club stack doesn't mean that you must have shortage, or that you're interested in playing at the five-level. What would you do with a hand where you think 4♠ might have made, 5♠ probably won't make, and 5♣ is going off?

[rhm]

Partner would bid 4♠ with a normal limit raise to 3♠, so 5♦ seems sensible. If he bids 5♥ I'll sign off, because I could be a lot better than this.

If partner has a limit raise and most of his values outside of clubs as the bidding seems to indicate, wouldn't you want to be in 6♠?

What are you supposed to learn by dithering?

What is your partner supposed to do over a 5 level red suit bid?

I expect partner to have at least one ace and if he does not have the king of spades (unlikely) it should be with East.

 

I think 6♠ is clear. If I would be a lot better I would invite a grand with 6♣

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

If partner has a limit raise and most of his values outside of clubs as the bidding seems to indicate, wouldn't you want to be in 6♠?

Yes, of course I would. That's why I'm making a bid that invites him to bid slam if he has a limit raise with most of his values outside clubs.

 

What are you supposed to learn by dithering?

By bidding 5♦, I'm hoping to learn whether partner has a limit raise with most of his values outside clubs.

 

I said that he could have a limit-raise type, not that he had promised one.

[rhm]

I said that he could have a limit-raise type, not that he had promised one.

So what else can partner hold? There is no such thing as a preempt over a preempt. We are red on white.

He may not have 10-11 HCP but then he must have compensating distributional values to jump to game and it is very likely that partner's shortage will not be in clubs as well.

The actual hand fits this description quite nicely in my opinion.

If partner held 10xxx,x,Axxxx,xxx I think he would not have jumped to game, yet 6♠ is still okay.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

So what else can partner hold? There is no such thing as a preempt over a preempt. We are red on white.

He may not have 10-11 HCP but then he must have compensating distributional values to jump to game and it is very likely that partner's shortage will not be in clubs as well.

The actual hand fits this description quite nicely in my opinion.

If partner held 10xxx,x,Axxxx,xxx I think he would not have jumped to game, yet 6♠ is still okay.

Is that the hand you meant to post? Slam seems to need a spade finesse and a 2-2 diamond break.

 

But that's most of the way to a good example of why I don't think it's right to insist on slam. Make it Kxxx x Axxxx xxx and presumably you'd be happy with the bidding, but slam is still against the odds.

 

And there's no guarantee that partner has an ace for his 4♠. Kxxxx x QJ10xx xx is an obvious 4♠ bid.

Edited August 6, 2012 by gnasher

[TheoKole]

The ops have given me a guess as to what contract should be played. Because there is lack of space to find out I will blast 6 ♠ and give them the last guess as to whether to sacrifice in 7 ♣ or not (they will probably have no idea what to do or how many defensive tricks they have). If they do sacrifice I will double for penalties of course.

 

Good luck and keep counting,

 

Theo

[SteveMoe]

As others have said bidding is more attractive than doubling or passing. 5♦ leaves maximum room for partner so let's start there. Would not fault 6♠. 5♥ might miss a partner loaded in ♦.

[Yu18772]

Thanks everyone. As it happens in this case it was a slam hand (partner held 10xxx - Axxxxx xxx) but the discussion focused on what double show mean here. Clearly you are not doubling on clubs so isn't this hand suitable?

 

You are not doubling on clubs pre se, but i think it should be a hand that does not want to play at 5 level. I would think its penalty oriented.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

[jogs]

Thanks everyone. As it happens in this case it was a slam hand (partner held 10xxx - Axxxxx xxx) but the discussion focused on what double show mean here. Clearly you are not doubling on clubs so isn't this hand suitable?

 

You guys should start playing fit showing jumps. Partner would then bid 4♦ instead of 4♠. The problems would be solved one round earlier.

 

Also, don't pass even if the pass is forcing. A forcing pass implies 2 small in opponents' suit.

[Zelandakh]

You guys should start playing fit showing jumps.

A lot of pairs play a vulnerable FJ to the 4 level as creating a FP. Are you sure you want to do that on this Responder's hand?

[jogs]

A lot of pairs play a vulnerable FJ to the 4 level as creating a FP. Are you sure you want to do that on this Responder's hand?

 

 

6-4 in two suits. One extra playing trick.

5 controls. 2 for the ♦A and 3 for the heart void.

Seems to fit the bill.

 

Will pull 5♣X to 5♦. Plan to pass 6♣X.

[phil_20686]

A lot of pairs play a vulnerable FJ to the 4 level as creating a FP. Are you sure you want to do that on this Responder's hand?

 

I have always felt that this defeats the purpose of FJ's. I like to get them in on those weak hands that might play great opposite the right hands. If you cannot fit jump on Axxx x KJTxx xxx you are badly placed.

 

Would not have fit jumped on the given hand though, as do not want partner to be discouraged by shortage particularly.

[bluecalm]

5S for me. Imo cuebidding here shows better hand. I am not sure if we are makign 5S even 50% of the time but the pot odds are there in this colours and once in a blue moon they make 5C anyway.

Additional bonus is that if we bid quickly and confidently they might be tempted to go for a save.

[jogs]

I have always felt that this defeats the purpose of FJ's. I like to get them in on those weak hands that might play great opposite the right hands. If you cannot fit jump on Axxx x KJTxx xxx you are badly placed.

 

Would not have fit jumped on the given hand though, as do not want partner to be discouraged by shortage particularly.

 

xxxx __ Axxxxx xxx

 

I don't agree that this is a weak hand. The bridge world is overly obsessed with HCP. This hand has more slam potential than Axxx x KJTxx xxx. Voids in a side suit are good for both offense and defense.

HCP and trumps are the two primary variables for estimating tricks. Flatness/skewness is the third variable. Extra length in a side suit is the fourth. The third and fourth variables in the 4063 hand is very strong.