At the table I passed. However, I was seriously considering bidding 5
♣ -- I did not bid because of partner's hesitation. My "sound bridge reason" line of thought was as follows:
1. Based on opponents bidding, partner most likely had 0 or 1
♠ cards
2. I have a singleton diamond -- only one loser there.
3. If North's 3
♠ jump bid shows some distribution (most likely) then partner must have heart values as well.
If partner had not hesitated, I thought I had a good 5
♣ sacrifice going.
Partner's hand was:
♠x
♥KQx
♦KJTx
♣KJ9xx }Partner's diamonds were worthless (
♦AQ were over the dummy) despite which
And as above, I held:
♠JTx
♥J987x
♦x
♣QTxx } our side has 9 tricks for -300. Spades were 5-4, hearts were 3-2 and 4
♠ was making easily.
655321, on May 21 2009, 01:28 PM, said:
Bidding 4♣ then 5♣ is just bad bridge, never mind the hesitation. The previous round was the time to decide how many clubs to bid. East apparently decided (wrongly IMO) to bid only 4♣. So it seems to me very hard to argue that something about his hand has changed, suddenly making the hand worth 5♣.
I fully agree, it was poor judgement on my part to bid only 4
♣. However, I believe there was additional information available to me after the 4
♠ bid (assuming no hesitation by partner)
a. It increases the possibility of a 5-4 or 6-4 spade split. Until then a 4-4 spade fit was possible (increases our loser by one)
b. It reduces the possibility of our side having club tricks in 4
♠. Opponents will choose to play 4
♣X if both of them have club losers.
The bidding so far:
East South West North
1♦ - pass - 1♠ - 2♣
3♠* - 4♣ - 4♠ - pass**
pass - ???