[kenrexford]

This is too sick for words. But, strangely I have some anyway.

What?!?!?

Your approach allows you to make a leap to 4♥ with that hand, and you wonder about the nuances of what to do after a 5♦ call? Are you serious? The description you gave as to the call of 4♥ is about the most ridiculous I have ever heard for a person playing something non-standard and presumably thought out and intentional. The only person I could imagine agreeing with your actual call is Bubba Jones, the 99-year-old fart who plays with the shortest straw each week. You have five-card support to the King, and Jack for that matter, nearly solidifying the suit. You have the King of diamonds, DOUBLETON for Christ's sake! And you have AKxx in clubs? What?!?! You need about 8 HCP from partner to lay down slam, something like ♠x ♥Axxxx ♦Axxxx ♣xx would do. So whay the heck bid 4♥ with that hand.

The scary part is that you are in doubt now about what to do after a 5♦ call. Partner is missing the two red Kings and the club Ace-King, but he commits to the 5-level? If partner has a sick hand that should never be opened, and then makes an implausibly insane 5♦ call, you likely will just make a small slam. If forced to guess, I'd take the push to the seven-level. Given room, I think I'll try a more mundane 6♣.

[jdonn]

I agree with 6♣ now. Really this was too good for 4♥ though, slam chances were too good. Remove a couple hearts from the hand and it's a more classic precision style 4♥ bid.

[Mbodell]

Well I agree my hand is too strong for the 4♥ bid (if I was playing full methods I certainly would have started relaying, without the relay I gave up on slam too quickly), I was overly concerned about preventing a possible good sac against our game when there was a lot of distribution to go around. I jumped to 6♥, not 6♣ (which I agree would be better), but unfortunately partner had x Qxxxx AQxxxx x and opponents started with the A♠ for down 1.

So ignoring the bad bidding on the actual hand, I was curious how people would take the 5♦ bid as mild slam try/natural (how I read it) or as lead directing/information giving for a decision over 5♠ (how my partner meant it).

[han]

I recommend not playing in sectionals anymore, sounds like you really need your relays.

[Mbodell]

han, on Apr 22 2008, 05:11 PM, said:

I recommend not playing in sectionals anymore, sounds like you really need your relays.

It is true, the evidence of this bad judgment position I took on one hand means we were lost without relays.

Of course that presumes that I'm never lost with relays and I have many other hands that can demonstrate that I'm fully capable of making bad judgments in relay and, for that matter, in standard or 2/1 so I equally shouldn't play anywhere else either.

[kenrexford]

Mbodell, on Apr 22 2008, 05:07 PM, said:

Well ... partner had x Qxxxx AQxxxx x and opponents started with the A♠ for down 1.

So ignoring the bad bidding on the actual hand, I was curious how people would take the 5♦ bid as mild slam try/natural (how I read it) or as lead directing/information giving for a decision over 5♠ (how my partner meant it).

Wow.

From your prior posts, I had thought (and I still think) that you have a mind for the game. But, your partner opened 1♥, and then bid 5♦, with that junk, unbalanced the wrong way for convenient rebidding, and your head did not explode? If this was systemically feasible, then your indication of a "~" was quite the understatement. LOL

As to the idea of lead-versus-cards. Rather than debate which it should have been, maybe solutions for the future make sense. Maybe 5♣ or 5♦ should be pure lead, but 4NT natural for a minor (5♣ asks, 5♥ says clubs). Maybe reverse these.