[EWeber]

Hi all,

we recently had a bidding that started as follows:

(3 ♣) p (5 ♣) 5 NT
(p) 6 ♣ ...

Do you have defined the difference between 5 NT and 6 ♣ from the first bidder?
And are there different interpretations of 6 ♣ from the 2nd Person?

Thanks for your answers.

Elke

[aguahombre]

If this comes up before I die:

1)5N will show ♦+ a Major, and the 6C advance will ask for the Major.

2)6♣ will show the Majors.

3) I still won't be an expert.

[gszes]

It is always a good idea to supply vulnerability. It should not matter much on this particular hand but it is a good habit.

After 5c 5n should show dia and a major (aquahombre) and 6c should show both majors.

Once p bids 5n there is essentially zero benefit to asking for partners major because there is no room to investigate. I would use 6d to play 6h as Pass Or Correct (POC) and save 6c as a highly specified grand slam try. My use would be first round control of clubs and (1 other ace or the dia K) and a fit with at least 5 trumps. xxxxx xxxxx K Ax or Axx xxx xxxxx Ax or xxxxx xxxxx Kxx void. Overcaller can then use 6d POC with no grand interest(advancer then p or bids 6h POC) or 7d POC Advancer then P or bids 7h POC). I do not pretend this is standard though so adopt at your own peril though this concept of "exceptionalism" can be applied in a variety of preemptive circumstances to search for small slams also.

[awm]

aguahombre, on 2015-May-17, 03:10, said:

If this comes up before I die:

1)5N will show ♦+ a Major, and the 6C advance will ask for the Major.

2)6♣ will show the Majors.

3) I still won't be an expert.

It must be better to use:

1) 5NT will show ♦+♥
2) 6♣ will show ♠+a red suit

The reason is that this guarantees you to find your best fit. Opposite the original scheme, suppose partner has a 5233 hand after 5NT showing diamonds and a major. Since the major is "probably" hearts he will sign off in 6♦, missing the best fit if partner has a big ♠+♦ two suiter. Opposite my suggested scheme, over 6♣ partner bids whatever red suit he would prefer to spades, and then the strong hand corrects if not holding the red suit partner bid. So for example with 3253 advancer tries 6♦ and then the 6♣ bidder can pass (with ♦+♠) or bid 6♥ (with ♥+♠) which advancer will correct to the superior spade fit. Or with 3532 advancer tries 6♥ and the 6♣ bidder corrects to 6♠ if holding the pointed suits.

In fact the same reasoning could be applied to the somewhat more common auctions of (3♣)-4♣ and (3♣)-4♦, where many would play the first as majors and the second as diamonds and a major, but it's likely better to play the first as spades and another and the second as the reds.

[aguahombre]

After 5N-6C, would suit-below continuations by the two-suited hand fix awm's concern? Not disputing Adam, just trying to ease the brain by a direct cue always being Mike and leaving 6D over a Direct 6C as some kind of last train for a grand.

This is a bit inconsistent with what we do directly over 2M, however; Direct cue=minors, and leaping mike.

[Zelandakh]

After 5NT, it seems to me that we have a lot of space. Let's start by taking the cheapest 2-suiter (♦+♥) and putting that in 6♣. That leaves ♠ + a red suit for 5NT. No problem there - we can find the red suit using 6♣ or bid our own red suit naturally. That also leaves open the sequence 6♣ - 6red - 6♠ open for something. This also seems to be a rule that could be applied generally over 5m - the cue covering the lowest 2 suits biddable at the 6 level and 5NT covering the remaining ones. Over 5♦ then, this logic would have 6♦ showing the majors with 5NT covering clubs and a major. That seems simpler than remembering one set-up for 5♣ and a completely different one for 5♦.

[KurtGodel]

You probably also have to discuss what 6♦ as a response to 6♣. I can imagine a disagreement about whether it is pick a major, to play or a general grand try. I would have thought it was natural, but there are some people with whom I play that if I bid this I can guarantee that they will think that this could be anything, but it doesn't show diamonds!