Do you move beyond game?

[ArtK78]

Matchpoints - None Vul. In 4th seat you hold:

 

Axx

AQJx

Qx

AQxx

 

(2♦) - P - (P) - x

(P) - 4♥ - (P) - ?

 

Your call?

[aguahombre]

I think there is a clue we might have two diamond losers. Or maybe Lefty is Kit, and we have AKQ of diamonds, but two other kings are offside.

[Quantumcat]

5♥ = I have two diamond losers what about you?

[lalldonn]

I seem to recall partner not overcalling 2♥. I think I'm good!

[aguahombre]

I seem to recall partner not overcalling 2♥. I think I'm good!

I think you mean content. We know you're good.

[lalldonn]

Yes content is more accurate. And thanks!

[lycier]

5♥ = I have two diamond losers what about you?

 

I agree, this auction want to ask partner about secondary control of diamond in effect.if partner have secondary control,he can rebid 6H;if he have ♦A,he can rebid 6D.

[chasetb]

If partner can't overcall or bid 3♥ to a pretty good hand despite the initial pass, and bid 4♥ missing 3 of top 4 honors, why should we be making a move? Let's give partner 9 Hearts, and we STILL might not be able to make it. I pass, it's not close.

[rogerclee]

I like 5H, slam try without a diamond control (but you don't have to bid slam with one). I feel that given we balanced w/w at MP, our hand could be so much worse. I don't expect much less than a very light opening bid from partner, and if that includes a diamond control, I like my chances.

[MrAce]

I agree with Josh, pd is guessing/gambling/overbidding whatever you may wan to call it. He didnt overcall 2♥. Yes there are hands that makes slam with a hand that doesnt overcall but then those hands would not blast 4♥ imo. Besides AQJx ♥ doesnt look as good as Axxx to me, probably wasted values.

 

For example i would blast 4♥ with hands like;

 

x Kxxxxx Jxxx xx / xx Kxxxxx xxxxx void etc etc

 

and hope to make it when pd has diamond shortness. If he is not short in ♦ perhaps he has clubs covered, AKxx / AQxx. And if he doesnt have that too, i wont be the first soldier who died in that type of heroic attempt :P

 

Basically for me when pd blasts 4♥, the more we have the more likely he will make game :)

[bluecalm]

I like 5H, slam try without a diamond control (but you don't have to bid slam with one)

 

Interesting, do you think it's better to have this than just "bid a slam with diamond control ?".

I intuitively prefer the latter but no strong opinion.

 

As to the hand I feel pass is perfect. Even if we flop Kxx Kxxxxx Axx x which is too much to hope for with perfect values and much more than partner needs to accept our try imo, the slam is still about 50%.

[han]

Even if partner has a great hand like Kxx KJxxxx x Kxx, slam is not so great. It's more likely that partner has 2 or more diamonds, given that 2D was not raised to 3. In that case slam chances looks even worse.

 

If we bid 5H and partner bids slam, I'd expect partner to make it about half the time, maybe less. If partner passes, obviously we would prefer to be back in 4H. All things combined I'd say that we should pass.

 

I like this problem very much. I also think that the only way to answer this kind of problem is to construct hands for partner consistent with the auction and estimate how good slam (or 5H) is for those hands.

[phil_20686]

Partner is showing a weakish hand with reasonable hearts, Kxxxxx hearts and one other card would be normal. Itts concievable that you can go off in 4H if partner has Kxx Kxxxxx xx xx if the club finesse is wrong, and lets not pretend we would not bid 4H with that.

[TimG]

Could partner have ♠Kx ♥Kxxxx ♦Kxxx ♣Kx?

 

I don't expect partner to be gambling on King-sixth and out opposite our balance, if it turns out we are strong, we'll bid over a simple advance (especially since we've balanced).

 

When constructing possible hands with a diamond control for partner, we should be thinking about the Ace or King 3rd or 4th given the failure of responder to raise.

 

If partner has a hand like ♠Kxx ♥KJxxxx ♦x ♣Kxx, might he have cue-bid 3♦ before bidding 4♥?

[gnasher]

Could partner have ♠Kx ♥Kxxxx ♦Kxxx ♣Kx?

Is that meant as a reason to bid, or a reason to pass?

 

6♥ seems likely to go down on a diamond ruff. 6NT will often make on a double squeeze, but not if they find a spade lead.

[phil_20686]

Could partner have ♠Kx ♥Kxxxx ♦Kxxx ♣Kx?

 

I don't expect partner to be gambling on King-sixth and out opposite our balance, if it turns out we are strong, we'll bid over a simple advance (especially since we've balanced).

 

When constructing possible hands with a diamond control for partner, we should be thinking about the Ace or King 3rd or 4th given the failure of responder to raise.

 

If partner has a hand like ♠Kxx ♥KJxxxx ♦x ♣Kxx, might he have cue-bid 3♦ before bidding 4♥?

 

Both of those hands start with a cue bid over the dble in my book. This is not even a Potentially competitive auction, so absolutely no reason to go jumping to game. That just gives partner a huge problem when he has a strong hand, that was completely unnecessary.

[ArtK78]

Thanks for all of the responses.

 

I found this to be very interesting. I bid 5♥, thinking that I had a much better hand than a mere balancing double, and that all I was likely to need from partner was a diamond control for slam. I was wrong, as many of the posters pointed out. The two hands:

 

Axx

AQJx

Qx

AQxx

 

QJx

KT87432

3

84

 

As bad as this looks, it is not hopeless. If both black Ks are onside, there is an easy black suit squeeze. But the ♠K was offside, so the slam had no play.

 

At the table, a diamond was led to the A (not the K), and a trump was returned. So, the ♦K appeared to be in the opening leader's hand. Does this create a squeeze on LHO in diamonds and clubs? I don't believe that the squeeze operates unless the ♠K is also onside.

 

I thought that the 4♥ bid would be better than this. But, as has been pointed out quite clearly, any hand with heart length and fair values will shoot out game on this auction. With power, a cue bid is warranted prior to bidding game.

 

Query: Assume that both black suit kings are onside. If the defense leads a diamond and, instead of just continuing diamonds, switches to a spade - Q, K, A - does this break up all squeezes?

 

Also at the table, the partner of the 2♦ opener thought long and hard over 6♥. He almost bid 7♦, having been silent to this point in the auction, holding:

 

9832

6

KJ56

K652

 

So, bidding slam almost worked anyway.

[Cyberyeti]

The worrying hand is xx, Kxxxxxx, x, KJx or similar where opp has decided not to reveal his massive diamond support in the hope that you'll misjudge it, but I think it's against the odds. Do you play some form of range splitting 2N after the double ? If not then 4♥ has a slightly wider range.

[gnasher]

As bad as this looks, it is not hopeless. If both black Ks are onside, there is an easy black suit squeeze.

Doesn't that require LHO to be 5=0=4=4?

[Phil]

If the ♦K is on your left, and both black suit finesses are working, you need West to have 5 clubs or 5 spades. Black suit (trump) squeezes (when West is 5044) get broken up with a return of either black suit. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think compounds work (give West 3=2=4=4 for instance) because of the entry situation.

 

Make sure you thank your opponents for not killing your diamond threat.

[aguahombre]

The expectations for decisions such as this one do change, as we see here, depending on whether your opponents are of a level where they will not raise partner's 2-bid with support and then think about competing over a game or slam.

 

I never assume that level when trying to solve a forum question, unless it is given.

[Vampyr]

I assume you have 3♥ as forcing, and 2NT followed by 3♥ as invitational, available? I think that the fact that partner didn't go any of these routes indicates a pretty poor hand opposite.

[rmnka447]

I think Vampyr makes a very good point about Lebensohl 2 NT still being on and offering advancer many options to show hands with all levels of values.

 

4 ♥ must show a hand with a few values and lots of ♥.

 

But the hand does illustrate that it's sometimes just as important to consider what partner didn't bid as much as what was bid.

[han]

I bid 5♥, thinking that I had a much better hand than a mere balancing double

 

Of course I agree that your hand was better than a minimum balancing double, much better. But that is not a good reason to force to slam! As I said earlier, I think you have to think about different hands that partner might have, and I believe that if you do, you would probably also come to the conclusion that pass is better. Of course it isn't always easy to guess what partner might have for his 4H bid.

[JLOGIC]

I'm in the lalldonn/han camp on this one