What would this sequence mean for you?

[bd71]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h1sd3s4sp5cp5d]133|100[/hv]

 

As North-South, what would this sequence mean in your 2/1 methods?

[mike777]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h1sd3s4sp5cp5d]133|100[/hv]

 

As North-South, what would this sequence mean in your 2/1 methods?

 

 

4s=rkc in H(not takeout, not cuebid, not exclusion, not 2 places to play)

5c=1-4

5d=QH ask

[fromageGB]

An impossible sequence in my methods, so I suppose in some methods X is a takeout to a minor, 4NT from north would be ace asking so 4♠ is "pick a minor" and now 5♦ is to play with a hand that would have bid 6 if south had bid 5♦ ?

 

It beats me. I can't swallow 4♠ as ace asking in hearts when X does not show support, but if it does, then it is feasible.

[PhilKing]

For me, this sequence shows, of all things, a good hand with hearts, diamonds and a control in spades.

 

The point is that 4♦ over 3♠ should be non-forcing. It's quite common to reason that 4♦ should be forcing, since we should not try to land on a pinhead, but I do not buy that - my 4♦ bid will often be a stretch, so partner is free to pass.

[kenberg]

I am positive that I have never discussed tis sequence with any partner. Therefore it means "You figure it out". I would figure as follows: Over 3S partner decided that 5D was playable. Howver, he has first round spade control so he thinks perhaps 6D will work. My last unforced bid was a double of 1S so I don't need to have all that much. If I have more than I have shown and if I have the Ace of clubs, I will bid 6D.

 

Basically my reasoning amounts to: It is possible for pard to have good diamonds, a good hand, and a spade void. If so, I can imagine that he might hope this is the way to show that.

 

I'll go out on a limb and guess that most players who rate themselves I/A have not discussed this auction with their partners. So we need to go with what seems most likely. If partner just wanted to play 5D he would have bid it over 3S. If he wanted to play 6C he would have bid it over 5C. If he is exploring for a grand, that's too deep for me. He can bid it over my 6D and maybe he will make it.

 

If there is some sort of kickback going on, then you need to have discussed it. Saying "We play 2/1 so surely partner will recognize this, or recognize my 4S, as kickback" doesn't work for me. In fact it is a reason I generally decline to play kickback. With enough discussion, I am sure that it is a fine convention.

[WesleyC]

For me this sequence shows Hearts, Diamonds and slam interest. Unlike Phil, I don't think it promises a spade control.

 

For example I might bid this way with: [xxx AKJxx KQJxx void].

 

With less slam interest e.g. [xx AKJxx KQJxx x] I would jump to 5D instead.

 

WesC

[lexlogan]

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h1sd3s4sp5cp5d]133|100[/hv]

 

As North-South, what would this sequence mean in your 2/1 methods?

Double promised both minors, or six diamonds but not strong enough to bid 2♦ immediately; note that "2/1" does not really aplly over competition. 5♣ shows clubs. Opener is therefore showing a very strong raise of diamonds, suggesting slam.

[ggwhiz]

5-5 or better in the red suits with slam interest and either a spade control or enough length that they know you have one as WesleyC pointed out.

[johnu]

With less slam interest e.g. [xx AKJxx KQJxx x] I would jump to 5D instead.

 

What are the chances of making 5♦ opposite a negative double of 1♠. You have 4 losers off the top so partner has to take care of 2 of them or you are down before you get started, either 2 aces or an ace and a single spade, or void in spades. I would bid 4♦ and hope that partner has a raise to 5.

[johnu]

I see this is the companion post to http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/70247-should-i-focus-on-my-extras/

 

I would assume this shows hearts, diamonds, and a hand interested in slam opposite the right negative double. Recognizing the right hand to raise to slam is like recognizing obscenity. You'll know when you see it :) Of course, sometimes you will be wrong :P