Raising a quantitative...

[Fluffy]

What does this bidding mean?

 

1♣-1♦

2NT-4NT

5NT

 

First time partnershipo, walsh and xyz agreed (But no further agreement)

[mgoetze]

Accepts the invite, suggests playing in a minor?

[mr1303]

Going for the special prize for 5nt making exactly. C.f. 1100 hat, 1C prize, Gerber prize.

[Cyberyeti]

We play this as "not a clear accept or decline", bid the slam with a maximum invite.

[gszes]

Want's to accept but 3334 downgrading hand a bit maybe the distribution will help p make a better choice

[gwnn]

Anything is better than "do you have 13 or 14?" But I'm afraid a lot of people are playing it like that and to make matter worse are also quite proud of it. In practice, I would just bid 6NT without thinking about it.

[ggwhiz]

In practice, I would just bid 6NT without thinking about it.

 

Unless I had the shape that makes 6♣ attractive, playing partner for 5 of them or 6♦ if I have 6 of them.

[WesleyC]

In the context you've given I guess it was accepting the invite and throwing the ball back to partner in case they had an unusual hand (eg 6322 or something and weren't sure what style of xfers we were playing).

 

However its not a bid that I would ever make in a pickup partnership.

[MrAce]

We play this as "not a clear accept or decline", bid the slam with a maximum invite.

 

This is probably the worst of all worlds.

[Cyberyeti]

This is probably the worst of all worlds.

 

Has worked well in that we haven't dialled 5N-1 yet and stayed out of one where without this available I'd have bid it and gone off, but sample size is still small. We use it in all quantitative auctions (we wouldn't have this exact one as 2N is not nat for us) and it's come up maybe 8 times. I agree it's not necessary if your NT ranges are 2 point, but it finds a niche with 3 point ranges (or 2 and a half as some of ours are).

[MrAce]

Has worked well .....

 

Cyber...if I had weird and bad agreements which you always claim them to work well, I'd probably be the name in BW and people would be trying to find out how I cheat, because I'd be winning almost everything out there!http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif

[SteveMoe]

Pick one:

A. Partner wants to torture me.

B. Partner suffers from terminal indecision muddled by clouded logic,

C. Partner found another Ace after bidding 2NT.

D. I forgot point 7 of the 3 last minute changes we added 5 minutes before the round.

E. Partner made a mechanical mistake with the bidding box.

F. There is a logical meaning but I just can't remember...

G. Partner has 5 1/2 NT and needs an extra 1/2 trick from my hand.

[Phil]

(32)35

[bigbenvic]

Any bid other than pass has to be an acceptance of the invite (though some play 5m as a 5 card suit to play) but logically it should deny a 5 card suit and I'd agree with mgoetze in that it's probably suggesting a 32 (or 23) 44 shape where 6 of a minor might have better play than 6nt.

[OBSugar]

Hey, it's not my fault. I didn't bid the slam.

[Fluffy]

 

I was playing with an american so I expected her to understand pick a slam. I had ♠Kx ♥AQ10x ♦A9x ♣AJ10x

 

She didn't take it that way, but turns out I was wrong regardless as partner had ♠Ax ♥Jxx ♦KQJ10x ♣Qxx. There was no benefit for playing diamonds.

 

690 32%.

1370 56%.

1440 72%.

 

[Cyberyeti]

Cyber...if I had weird and bad agreements which you always claim them to work well, I'd probably be the name in BW and people would be trying to find out how I cheat, because I'd be winning almost everything out there!http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif

 

As I said it's working well on a small sample size, some of these things have worked well for 20 years and I'm very comfortable with, this is a relatively new one, first time I bid it I did so unagreed, partner interpreted it as I intended it. As I said it's not gone wrong yet and most of the time it makes no difference as the decision you'd make without the bid available would lead to the same result, we're 7/8 the same result, 1/8 improvement which I'd settle for.

[gnasher]

I wouldn't expect a suit contract to be better than 6NT when you had all those minor honours between the two hands. If you'd had Kx AKxx A9x Axxx opposite Axx xxx KQJ10x Kx, 6♦ would have been much better than 6NT.

[gnasher]

After 4NT, I think that:

 

6♣ shows a 6-card suit, eg Ax Axx Qx KQJxxx, where you might need to play in clubs for control purposes.

6♦ shows four of them.

All five-level actions should be slam-forcing and less committal about strain, but I wouldn't risk five of a minor without discussion.

5M shows something like a (42)34 or (32)35 shape, bidding the length. That lets us get to 6D when we need a ruff in the strong hand.

5NT suggests playing in 6♣ or 6♦, but not as forcibly as jumping to the six-level.

 

Edit: Some not entirely convincing examples of a 5NT bid:

  Axx Kxx Kxx AKQx

  Ax Axx Qxx AKJxx

Edited September 25, 2015 by gnasher

[gszes]

 

I was playing with an american so I expected her to understand pick a slam. I had ♠Kx ♥AQ10x ♦A9x ♣AJ10x

 

She didn't take it that way, but turns out I was wrong regardless as partner had ♠Ax ♥Jxx ♦KQJ10x ♣Qxx. There was no benefit for playing diamonds.

 

690 32%.

1370 56%.

1440 72%.

 

 

My understanding (for those that want to increase their accuracy by a fairly small margin) beware that these replies will take almost all of the mystery out of defending.

5c wants to accept with 5 card suit but suit not very good HT or less.

5d** 32 OR 23 44 in case p wants to consider 6d (they can bid 5h or 5s if they have 3 cards there to see if potential ruff is available)*

5h** wants to accept showing 2434 in case minor suit contract looks better*

5s** wants to accept showing 4234 in case minor suit contract looks better*

5n wants to accept but 3334 distribution acting as a deterrent

 

* do not use this with HH in the short suit. Under these conditions (where YOU promised the spade stop) you will be holding Ax or Kx to bid this way.

** these bids are primarily for IMPS where being in the safest slam reaps far more benefit than it does at MP.

 

Following the above you would bid 5s bid and p would realize there is little future in a suit contract (and that the opps have QJ of spades wasted) and they will have little trouble opting for 6n.

[case_no_6]

Pulling out 5NT is probably not the best move in a new partnership.

 

However, with that said, what to do?

 

I would think that 5NT could have two reasonable meanings in the absence of discussion:

 

1. I am not sure whether to accept. You decide, partner.

 

2. I am accepting, but I have real clubs and 3 card diamond support. Pick a slam - 6C, 6D, or 6NT.

 

I personally don't think the first meaning is particularly useful on a frequency basis. But the second meaning is intelligent and will occur frequently. It is the one I would presume and, if I am wrong, I have learned that the potential for this new partnership to flourish does not seem too bright.

[Fluffy]

Pulling out 5NT is probably not the best move in a new partnership.

Not really, good looking 18 would be happy to play any of 5NT, 6m or 6NT. You don't try undiscussed biddings without a back up plan. But 5NT was solid.

[jodepp]

Isn't this just an adaptation of the principle that bidding a new suit after a quantitative acceptance says 'let's look for a fit before committing to notrump"?

 

5NT would appear to be an acceptance of the try (those who suggest that it asks for a 'max invite' are trying too hard IMO). The 5NT bidder sounds like he has a prime hand that has a ruffing value in a major and is simply checking back for club support or maybe a 4-4 major fit.

 

Additional caveat: The 5NT bidder probably doesn't have four diamonds - he would take the pressure off by bidding 6D after 4NT. 6D by the 4NT asker therefore implies having a fifth diamond. A possible 5=3 diamond fit could yield an extra trick if the 5NT bidder has a major-suit doubleton.

[zillahandp]

Means lessons needed esp the 5nt bidder usng half points?

[alok c]

Choose between 6d/6nt.