[Hanoi5]

4♣ was an interesting way of dealing with that problem hand. Pass is another. 4NT quantitative is wonderful but very few people will have such agreement. Why didn't partner bid 4NT over 4♦?

[mikeh]

part 1: after this start, my concern would be over whether to play 6 or 7 of a minor, with a mild concern about which minor... suspecting that either would work, but that diamonds will probably afford an edge... I would bid 5♥... which I think sends the right message.. it forces to a slam and shows the void.

part 2: I would have bid 3N. Having perpetrated the 4♣ (when the worst thing that partner can do is raise you on, say, Jxx, maybe you shouldn't make the call), wild horses couldn't get me to cue 4♥. Even tho I can see that 4♥ could work out (in the sense of being survivable on the actual hand) I think that 4♥ is an enormous overstatement and misstatement of values. Admittedly, I have painted myself into a corner, and admittedly this would be an ideal place, on this hand, for a choice of games cuebid, but while COG cues are powerful, I wouldn't play this cue as one. I would prefer to bid 4♠.

Opener is not about to pass 4♠, but I have some trouble seeing how we get back to diamonds after the preference.

In fact, I suspect that the actual sequence is more likely to reach a playable, if thin, 6♦ than any auction that I think I would come up with as responder.

As for why I choose 3N: 2 reasons.... having half my hcp in hearts is a reason to downgrade the hand, and it is too easy to see problems ahead if I bid 4♣...including the problem that I don't believe that it is possible to get to notrump below the 6 level after 4♣.

BTW, what do we think N should do over a pressured 3N? I'd bid 4♦, but I wouldn't be filled with confidence. That would, I assume, fetch 4♥.

[OleBerg]

Hanoi5, on Jun 9 2009, 04:40 PM, said:

4NT quantitative is wonderful but very few people will have such agreement.

Which is really lazy. If you want to ask for keycards with spades, it is highly unlikely we will get hurt by starting with a 4♥ bid.

The hands that simply needs to check aces, and is vulnerable to a 5♥ call by next hand, has a much lower frequency than hands that fit a quantitative bid.

[P_Marlowe]

microcap, on Jun 8 2009, 09:15 AM, said:

This was really bad, even for Rex and me.

As always, there will be a part 2  so stay tuned to the Bat-Channel!

You hold a nice collection: 

Dealer: South Vul: E/W Scoring: IMP

♠ KJ8762 ♥   ♦ AKQ72 ♣ Q7

You open 1♠, annoying LHO preempts 3♥.

In addition to the normal tools, we play that a double by partner here is 10+HCP, and pretty likely not to have 3+ cards in spades and unlikely to have a heart stopper.

Partner bids 4♣.    You rebid 4♦.  Partner bids 4♥.  What do you think he has?  What is your next bid?

5D.

Added later: 5D is not enough, 6D is a lot better.

[P_Marlowe]

microcap, on Jun 9 2009, 06:31 AM, said:

Ok so Part 2---

Partner opens 1♠, rho preempts 3♥.

You hold:

Scoring: IMP

---

.

What do you bid?

3NT.

[microcap]

I am embarrassed to tell everyone the ending, but full disclosure is my policy.

After my 4♥ bid, which wasn't really meant to do anything but show a heart control and slam interest, also having the virtue of being the cheapest bid, Rex now jumped to 6♣, which one or two people mentioned as a possibility but I think is absolutely nuts.

I thought he had something like KQxxx AKxxx void AQx. So I bid 7♣ [stupid I know, but I do stupid things.]

Not a happy outcome.