[Hanoi5]

Team match:

---

Do you pass or do you go on?

[nigel_k]

I would go on, expecting partner to be at least 5-5 or 4-6 to bid this way and the odds favour him having an ace. I know my hand is limited and 5♣ is a signoff but I have a perfect maximum which partner won't necessarily try to cater for, e.g. xx Axxxx x Jxxxx.

[skjaeran]

North could have bid to 5♣ in a different way, showing values on his way.
Bidding it this way sounds more like a gamble. And though I'm absolutely maximu,, with very nice controls, I'm afraid my trump queen is of dubious value. And I haven't got any trick source. So I'm passing.

[dake50]

I'm thinking partner has a S-void.
"Hope not too much duplication your stop/my void". There is, I quit.

[mikeh]

I was trying to come up with a reason to pass....and was going to ask how good partner is, with a view to arguing that with an expert, pass should be clear, because my hand is good but within expectation, and he had an easy way to suggest slam interest opposite this hand type, via 3♠ then 4♣.

But I couldn't come up with any example on which he has a 5♣ call where we have no play for slam.

So even with an expert partner, I think I'd take the push to 6♣. Everything about my hand is golden...I really like my heart holding, for example.

I wouldn't personally be 4-4 in the minors: I would have opened 1♦ and would have to rely, on this hand, on partner showing clubs over 2N (for me, via a 3♠ optional transfer', but that's an irrelevancy given the conditions of contest.

Edit: I wouldn't give any weight to any notion of his having 5 hearts....he doesn't. He would check back for hearts. If he has a spade void, that's great......I can say goodbye to my diamond losers unless he is precisely 0=4=4=5. I suspect he is in fact 4=6 in the rounded suits....and I'm not worried about my lack of a trick source....I'm delighted I can ruff his hearts and win the 3 side tricks with Aces.

[kayin801]

I would hope that with a spade void partner would make an advance cue of 3♠ (choice of games otherwise?) so over our probable 3NT he could bid 4♣, so I'd guess partner has at least one spade, if not two.

Agree with the likelihood of partner having 4-6 hand, probably 1=4=2=6 or 2=4=1=6. We've pretty much guaranteed 4 clubs on this auction (depending on support X agreements) but with a 9 card fit partner might try 3NT anyway. The exception might be the 0=4=4=5 hand mikeh mentioned since we have implied 3 diamonds with our bidding unless 4=2=2=5 or 4=1=3=5.

I'm trying 6♣, if my partner has his bid then I have mine.

[gwnn]

partner is not trying for slam so I am not overruling him.

[MrAce]

% 100 pass for me. Partner is guessing. Would not even cross my mind to bid 6, but it is kinda fashion in BBO forums to limit your hand and then second guess partner's game decision and bid 6 WITHOUT enough keycards in the hand.

Partner is very weak and hoping to make 5 ♣ if i have the right stuff for him. We probably have it therefore don't punish him, even if his decision for 5♣ instead of 3 NT turns out to be wrong.

xx Jxxx xx Axxxx, x Jxxx xxx Axxxx, xxx Jxxx x Axxxx here you go, i even put an ace there. Tons of scenarios to defeat 3NT but even if we make 3 NT, pd did bid 5♣. I am guessing we play support dbl, if so we denied 3 cards ♥ and partner is guessing we have 4 + ♣ suit. Not even safe in 5♣

[Fluffy]

All my cards working except maybe ♠K & ♣Q, if we have some awful duplication I will be sorry, but I am blasting 6.

[mikeh]

I don't understand how people can suggest partner holds a very weak hand with Axxxx in clubs and out....if he was going to gamble a game on such hands, why not 3N???

Why would any competent player bid 5♣ with MrAce's xxx Jxxx x Axxxx hand? Construct a range of 2N rebid hands and try to find ones on which 11 tricks in clubs is both attainable and superior to 3N. The same is true for xx Jxxx xx Axxxx. You may be able to create some, but I suspect that an honest set of criteria for a simulation would show that they are relatively few and far between....the cd drive in my computer is not working right now so I can't run one.

Imo, 5♣ has to be on extreme shape (4-6 is my guess.

Opposite xx xxxx x Axxxxx or x xxxx xx Axxxxx, slam depends only on a 2-1 trump break and the heart Ace onside....which, given the bidding, seems more likely than not. And we may survive a 3-0 trump break.

I am not suggesting that we assume he has this hand....but I am suggesting that this type of hand is at least as likely, and imo more likely, than the semi-balanced yarboroughs of the MrAce constructions. Is anyone seriously suggesting that partner make a slam move with a working 4 count?

I am usually one of the proponents of the 'trust partner' school of bidding...and I began my initial response by drafting an argument that we should pass for that reason....but I then started to think.....a habit that I don't always manage to adopt....and realized that virtually any 4=6 hand consistent with 5♣ made slam good. Thus as little as xx Axxx x xxxxxx makes for a great slam, and so on....and, once again....why assume his hand is that bad?

As for 'putting an Ace in there'....I don't think that there are a whole lot of hands on which 5♣seems sensible, compared to 3N, without an Ace somewhere.....after all, our 2N didn't promise virtually all the controls, and 11 tricks can be problematic when they cash Aces and Kings.

Of course, these are merely my views, and as such are as fallible as I am *





* in case han is reading

[l milne]

6♣. I agree with nigel, mike and Fluffy, and while I generally agree with the "you've limited your hand so don't kick, partner isn't interested" school, I think here that is using a maxim in place of thinking. Construct some hands!

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2010-December-09, 15:29, said:

* in case han is reading

LOL

[rduran1216]

Partner has no idea I have AK A in the suits he's got losers, nor that I have K of hearts nor that I have KQ10x in his 6 card club suit.

I think this is an easy 6C bid, partner's placing the contract without knowing about your heavy controls and key cards.

[MrAce]

You would make sense to me, if 5 ♣ bid meant " bid 6 if u think u have working cards" rather than " i am jumping from 2 NT to 5♣ so that you won't think anything dangerous, and we make this 5♣ on a lucky day"

Funny if not sad, people think partner would not make any move except than 5♣ with a 6-4 hand + Ace vs our 18-19 balanced and we opened partner's 6 card suit! Ohh not enough beans to make a slam move with that ? Seems like you guys are so busy with trying to find excuses for a bad bid, while totally ignoring all the other bids that partner could have made.

No need to mention, even if u did FIND a hand like x Jxxx Qx Axxxxx you are not even COLD for slam for god's sake. This topic is getting more and more entertaining to me

x QJxx x Jxxxxxx how about this, is this a good reason to bid 5♣ ? Of course he has a bad hand, thats WHAT HE SAID by 5 ♣ why does it makes u surprised when he said he has a bad hand, which part of it you do not want to understand ? Why is this agressivity to bid slam ? Ironically (actually not) i see the same people who bids those slams, are too passive when it comes to bid games.

[rduran1216]

MrAce, on 2010-December-09, 16:18, said:

You would make sense to me, if 5 ♣ bid meant " bid 6 if u think u have working cards" rather than " i am jumping from 2 NT to 5♣ so that you won't think anything dangerous, and we make this 5♣ on a lucky day"

Funny if not sad, people think partner would not make any move except than 5♣ with a 6-4 hand + Ace vs our 18-19 balanced and we opened partner's 6 card suit! Ohh not enough beans to make a slam move with that ? Seems like you guys are so busy with trying to find excuses for a bad bid, while totally ignoring all the other bids that partner could have made.

No need to mention, even if u did FIND a hand like x Jxxx Qx Axxxxx you are not even COLD for slam for god's sake. This topic is getting more and more entertaining to me

I would be willing to bet partner's hand is something like x Jxxx xx AJxxxx or xx Qxxx x Axxxxx or x xxxx Qx Axxxxx

I disagree about jumping to 5C with an implied 9 card club fit on a hand where 3NT is probably best. Spade shortness and AJxxxx clubs and almost out seems like the only thing partner can have given our holding, and with our K hearts probably well placed, I think its worth the raise.

I do agree with the 1417 hand being possible/likely also, but I think its worth the risk given the info we have

[mikeh]

MrAce, on 2010-December-09, 16:18, said:

No need to mention, even if u did FIND a hand like x Jxxx Qx Axxxxx you are not even COLD for slam for god's sake. This topic is getting more and more entertaining to me

LOL: this from a man who criticized those who failed to raise 3♠ to 4♠ in a recent Cascade thread by suggesting that they must need ten cashers off the top to risk game. Now, he doesn't want to 'risk' a slam on a hand on which success depends, at worst, on finding the only missing Ace in the hand of the only bidding (non-preemptively, at that) opponent!

Well, they do say that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, so I guess he doesn't suffer from hobgoblins very much

As for the hand x QJxx x Jxxxxxx....yes...it is possible that he has that hand and chose to bid it as he did, tho I don't know why......KQx xxx AKx AKxx would make 3N a little safer than 5♣...something about needing Aces at the 5 or 6 level....but that's just me, I guess....but surely even a man of MrAce's powerful convictions would agree that this is only one, and one remote, construction?

[MrAce]

mikeh, on 2010-December-09, 16:46, said:

LOL: this from a man who criticized those who failed to raise 3♠ to 4♠ in a recent Cascade thread by suggesting that they must need ten cashers off the top to risk game. Now, he doesn't want to 'risk' a slam on a hand on which success depends, at worst, on finding the only missing Ace in the hand of the only bidding (non-preemptively, at that) opponent!

Well, they do say that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, so I guess he doesn't suffer from hobgoblins very much

As for the hand x QJxx x Jxxxxxx....yes...it is possible that he has that hand and chose to bid it as he did, tho I don't know why......KQx xxx AKx AKxx would make 3N a little safer than 5♣...something about needing Aces at the 5 or 6 level....but that's just me, I guess....but surely even a man of MrAce's powerful convictions would agree that this is only one, and one remote, construction?

Yes this same man, and this same man will not really waste his time to explain you the difference between bidding AGRESSIVELY slams and bidding AGRESSIVELY games. I am sure there is no difference for you between them since u wrote what you wrote.

@ Rduran: In fact a Axxxxx 6 cards ♣ makes it more atractive for partner to try 3 NT than it does with Axxxx. Partner is also following the auction, especially if we play support double, failing to do so, he is guessing our 4+ cards ♣. He had a lot of space and bid available to show a hand with AJxxxx cards support + a stiff or void on side vs a strong balanced hand when pd opened that 6 card suit. Expecting an ACE alone is very optimistic letalone 6 cards trumps...ohhh not enough our ♥ K must be well placed too, because our RHO bid 1♠ OF COURSE he has ♥ Ace.

The folks here who are considering to bid 6 with this hand, probably have no agreement with their pd , how to show minor support after pd rebids 2NT. How to show shortness and how to stop at 4NT afterwards... Therefore they are just shooting a bullet into darkness, incase it may hit a deer now and then. But the matter of fact is, especially if partner is a decent player, u will be lucky if u make this 5♣

x Qxxxx xx Jxxxx i also bid 5♣, pd doesn't have 3 card ♥ and 5♣ bid is for that kind of hands really, not a 6-4 hand, an Ace and a stiff or void... JESUS! Thats where u guys and i disagree. I believe pd already said what he had, which is almost NOTHING except than hope and a little shape.

But hell.. with hands like x Qxxxx xx Jxxxx, and with partners like you, i will pass 2 NT and let you suffer each time in 2NT while we are cold for 5 clubs, in return i will find a slam that others cant maybe one day. And thats exactly whats going to happen, the way u guys bid even if u get away this hand, u will get caught by partner frequently in other hands.

[kayin801]

MrAce, on 2010-December-09, 17:07, said:

The folks here who are considering to bid 6 with this hand, probably have no agreement with their pd , how to show minor support after pd rebids 2NT. How to show shortness and how to stop at 4NT afterwards... Therefore they are just shooting a bullet into darkness, incase it may hit a deer now and then. But the matter of fact is, especially if partner is a decent player, u will be lucky if u make this 5♣

Or your partner has way less for his 5♣ then the rest of our partners do?

[nige1]

Hanoi5, on 2010-December-09, 12:43, said:

Team match:

Do you pass or do you go on?

---

IMO 6♣ = 10, _P = 6. Undisciplined but hoping that partner has

• ♠ x ♥ Axxx ♦ xx ♣ Jxxxxx so that 6♣ is excellent or at least
• ♠ x ♥ xxxx ♦ xx ♣ Axxxxx so that it is on a finesse

But partner's 5♣ is a signoff, so you apologise to partner and team-mates when 6♣ fails.

[jschafer]

Partner probably has exactly 4♥ and probably 6+♣s for his bidding. It doesn't look like we need to play him for much more than an Ace to make slam a decent contract. He should have some values for responding to 1♣ as opposed to preempting and there isn't much left if he is short in the pointed suits. We have shown an 18/19 BAL hand so partner will not be making slam tries on every hand where he has shape (which he needs for 5♣ anyway) and an Ace (he has already shown some hcps). If he does start splintering on any hand with an Ace you will be raising to slam on hands less ideal than this one by playing him for having his slam interest bid opposite your limited hand. His range is anywhere from a minimum response to 8/9 points and it doesn't seem unreasonable to play him for values in the suits he showed 10+ cards in. RHO overcalled 1♠ unfavourable so the Ace of ♥s is probably onside if partner doesn't have it. Fwiw, I don't see this as overruling partner's decision at all just reevaluating after acquiring more information.

EDIT: Presumably 1NT instead of 2NT should show the same hand and the OP auction was like the 1♠ never happened, so I assume their regular 2NT structure would be on and 3♥ is still possible. If they did play Sup X, it would (should?) have been mentioned in the OP imo.