5th level decision - sac or not?

[diana_eva]

[hv=pc=n&e=SAKQT42HJ9872D3C4&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1S2D2S3SP5Dpp?]200|300[/hv]

 

Agree with the bidding so far?

 

Now what?

 

North/South were Garozzo and JEC

[eagles123]

5 spades

[inquiry]

I would hate to be in this position. The good news is 5♠ will lose at most two in the minors and three hearts for down three (-500) so if they can make game, it is a cheap save. The bad news they might not be able to make 5♦ (we might have two spades and partner might have as many as two tricks in his hand). It certainly sounds like a very distributional hand but they may be stretching. I don't know if I would pass or bid 5♠, but I wouldn't be in this exact situation because of the answer to the next question.

 

Do I agree with the bidding so far? No.

 

I would open 1♠, that bid is ok. Over 3♠ I would have to decide between

 

• Do I want to bid game and never consider a save against 5♦? (yes/no). If I knew what to do when (if) they bid 5♦ I would bid 4♠. Partner would not be consulted on making a decision over 5♦ then (he supposedly defined his hand with 2♠ so he will have to pass over 5♦ and let me decide what to do.
• Do I want to take a unilateral save against 5♦ or 6♦? Then I would bid 5♠ now, or I could have bid 4♠ earlier and then take the push to 5♠. This is better than passing then bidding 5♠ as it will not be clear that the 2♦ overcaller had extra values for his 5♦. Something that is clear when you pass 3♠ and they jump to 5♦. This might have allowed the 3♠ to bid 6♦ on some hands.
• Do I want to suggest a save at the five level? Then I would do one of several things. I might bid 3NT planning on running when doubled, I might bid 4♥ suggesting taking the push to 5♠ if partner fits for hearts. I might double 3♠ if that is not conventional for don't lead a spade to suggest bidding on, or I might cue-bid 4♦. I

On this hand, I think I would try 4♥ because if partner fits for hearts as well, and gets him involved in the decision making process. After all this could be a double game swing, with both sides making contracts at the five level. That will let partner know I am considering bidding on over 5♦. The we could try to cooperate on rather to save or not based on where partner's honors are (heart honors good, minor honors not so good for bidding on).

 

 

[Phil]

Would have bid 4!s. Pretty tough call over 5!d, but 5!s rates to be right often enough.

[MrAce]

It may not be everyone's taste but I am strong believer of 4♠ opening at the first place and be silent for the rest of the auction.

[Mbodell]

I'll bid 5♠. It would have been nicer if we hadn't passed 3♠, I'm not sure I would have bid 4♥, even though that is the most descriptive bid, just because I might be more worried about helping opponents than partner, but it certainly would have been nicest here.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&e=SAKQT42HJ9872D3C4&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1S2D2S3SP5Dpp?]200|200|

Agree with the bidding so far?[/hv]

IMO, there are several possible approaches with this kind of hand

• Pass and show a 2-suiter later.
• Open 1♠.
• Open 2♠ and jump rebid in ♥. IMO, quite descriptive.
• Open 4♠ as MrAce suggests

 

Now what? North/South were Garozzo and JEC

IMO 5♠ = 10, Pass = 8, 5♥ = 6. A drawback of bidding 5♠ is you may have similar decisions over higher ♦ contracts. The problem with bidding ♥ is that partner might take the bid as suggesting a lead.