[Jinksy]

---

Butler IMPs.

[PhilKing]

I like 5♦. It could work badly, but I like it a lot. I could not really criticise a double of 4♦ but I prefer to go for the pot with this much shape.

Having said that, I could hardly have less, so pass now is clear.

[nige1]

Jinksy, on 2015-July-17, 17:03, said:

[hv=pc=n&w=skj853hakqt4dcaq5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=2dp4d5dp5sp]133|200|

Butler IMPs.]/hv]

Over RHO's 4♦:

• 5♦ Good hand with Ms.
• 4♠ Introduce ♥ If opponents bid 5♦.
• Double keeps ♣s and penalties in picture.

After partner's 5♠:

• Pass. Partner had his chance.
• 6♠ In case partner misevaluated

[gszes]

I am not really sure we even belong in spades much less slam level. There is no ideal way to bid this hand (preempts work)
I would have chosen x and if p manages 4h or 4s I will be a lot happier about pursuing slam. I have some concerns p will convert to penalty but those should be infrequent.

[ibraves]

I know the hand so I'll put my answer in spoilers but our auction produced quite a heated post mortem from EW. Would appreciate input as to what you would bid with South's hand:

Spoiler

---

, I was N

[apollo1201]

Having made all that noise, I have now to respect partner's decision. 5D was already a strong move - but I like it too :-)

[apollo1201]

Omg just read the spoiler. What did u have as N? QJ 8th and out (or CK) with a void or 2 major singletons? After 2D opening, 5D seems right. After 4D mayabe pass hoping they dont go to 6 (which should make unless partner has a natural trick or a ruff if they play S)? Because if we push them, both opponents will be keen on adding one for the road because of the D void that their partner "wont expect".

[Jinksy]

I'm wondering if I posted the wrong problem now.

Suppose instead of the OP auction, it had gone thusly:

2♦ P 5♦

What do you call on the west hand?

[broze]

Jinksy, on 2015-July-19, 09:15, said:

I'm wondering if I posted the wrong problem now.

Suppose instead of the OP auction, it had gone thusly:

2♦ P 5♦

What do you call on the west hand?

Pretty obvious double now. Not nearly good enough for 6D and 5M risks a ridiculous spot.

[rhm]

PhilKing, on 2015-July-17, 17:21, said:

I like 5♦. It could work badly, but I like it a lot. I could not really criticise a double of 4♦ but I prefer to go for the pot with this much shape.

Having said that, I could hardly have less, so pass now is clear.

Of course 5♦ showed a strong hand.
Nevertheless I do not expect partner to bid more with the ♠Q.
In fact I doubt he would with the ♠A and out.
I think answering the question here whether you have strength in reserve is misleading, because partner is still not in a good position to anticipate your hand.
It seems likely that the ♣K is onside.
Since partner might make 12 tricks where his only honor card is the ♥J I will raise.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

broze, on 2015-July-19, 15:22, said:

Pretty obvious double now. Not nearly good enough for 6D and 5M risks a ridiculous spot.

I am not convinced.
I would double with a balanced powerhouse.
DBL will end the auction very often since partner will not have enough diamonds to anticipate your void.
You will play there frequently even when a grand is cold.
I rather try 6♦ (5NT might be better) and expect slam to be on a reasonable percentage of time.

Rainer Herrmann

[the_clown]

rhm, on 2015-July-20, 04:23, said:

I am not convinced.
I would double with a balanced powerhouse.
DBL will end the auction very often since partner will not have enough diamonds to anticipate your void.
You will play there frequently even when a grand is cold.
I rather try 6♦ (5NT might be better) and expect slam to be on a reasonable percentage of time.

Rainer Herrmann

Completely agree with Rainer. Besides if you bid it confidently they may sometimes save.

[rmnka447]

Pass seems right now.

The 5 ♦ bid committed us to at least a 5 level major suit contract. So the hand ought to be a 2 or 3 loser hand at most. Bidding at this level ought to reflect about what you think can be made.

Since partner should realize this, it's up to partner to place the contract. If partner holds ♠ Qxxxx ♥ xxx ♦ x ♣ Kxxx and can't find a 6 ♠ call, that just the breaks. Preempts work. If partner holds ♠ Axxxx ♥ xxx ♦ x ♣ Kxxx and only bids 5 ♠ that isn't your fault.

The problem with bidding on is that you can't know whether partner has bid a forced 5 ♠ on something like ♠ xxxx ♥ Jxx ♦ Q ♣ xxxxx or not.

[phil_20686]

I am going to bid 6s and I would like partner to bid on with Axxxx spades and the club K. I think I am a little good for 6S directly, which could be more of a punt than this on the right sort of hand. So I will bid 5N and correct to spades. That shows for me a GST with a worry about the trump suits, and more or less guarantees he won't raise without the spade ace. It could still go wrong.

I think passing is very wrong. When you have this much stuff the chance of partner bidding 6S on his own is just really small. Are you really expecting him to pile into 6 spades with Axxx xxx xx Kxxx which is a pretty cold slam? Are you even sure that 5d shows a void? I'm not, it feels a lot like Micheals to me. What else are you supposed to bid with KQxxx KQxxxx - xx ? If I can have that hand and this hand then I have to raise to slam, and I have to do more than 'just' raise.

[PhilKing]

phil_20686, on 2015-July-28, 04:34, said:

I am going to bid 6s and I would like partner to bid on with Axxxx spades and the club K. I think I am a little good for 6S directly, which could be more of a punt than this on the right sort of hand. So I will bid 5N and correct to spades. That shows for me a GST with a worry about the trump suits, and more or less guarantees he won't raise without the spade ace. It could still go wrong.

I think passing is very wrong. When you have this much stuff the chance of partner bidding 6S on his own is just really small. Are you really expecting him to pile into 6 spades with Axxx xxx xx Kxxx which is a pretty cold slam? Are you even sure that 5d shows a void? I'm not, it feels a lot like Micheals to me. What else are you supposed to bid with KQxxx KQxxxx - xx ? If I can have that hand and this hand then I have to raise to slam, and I have to do more than 'just' raise.

I don't think you would get much support for bidding 5♦ on KQxxx KQxxxx - xx, but the construction is entirely implausible. Ask yourself this: when the bidding goes 2♦-pass-4♦ it is WAY more likely I actually a lot of high cards than a weak 6-5 of some ilk.

Now imagine partner is looking at the first hand you quote: let's call it Axxxx xxx xxx Kx. Form his point of view, the chances that you hold a weak 65 or 66 that wants to add an extra level to get to the right strain are zero, since the raise 4♦ would otherwise make no sense (since it means they have made a preemptive raise to partscore when they are on the club finesse for slam).

Call me old-fashioned, but when I cue my way to the five level when I could try and play in four, I don't have an aceless ten count, so with two useful cards, partner should certainly drive slam, and should explore grand on the way.