[kenrexford]

OK. A challenge. Let's see who the first person will be to explain this last call. At the table, after the auction was over, I asked and received the official response, and the official response CLEARLY was correct. That is, you will all agree later (perhaps tongue in cheek) that the person making the call was in fact forced to bid the hand the way she did, for unusual reasons. so, explain this 5♣ call:

1♣-1NT-P-2♦(transfer)
P-2♥-2♠-3♥
3♠-5♣?!?!?

Oh, in all fairness, I must mention that I was the one opening 1♣, and I am known by all parties in the auction to open 1♣ with a worthless doubleton frequently, as we play an unbalanced 1♦ opening. hence, I might have 3-2 in clubs.

[aguahombre]

An immediate 2C/1C would have been Mike?
3C/the transfer would have been some kind of superaccept? He hopes someone will bid again after 2H.
He wants to play 5C?

[hrothgar]

The bext explanation that I can come up with is that this is a lead directing raise to 5♥

Potentially, the 1NT bidder holds something like

♠ K
♥ Qxx
♦ Axxxx
♣ AKQx

[kayin801]

Voidwood for ♥

[ArtK78]

kayin801, on 2011-April-08, 13:23, said:

Voidwood for ♥

Seems a little odd by a player who overcalled 1NT.

[gwnn]

1-4-2-6 18 count

[aguahombre]

gwnn, on 2011-April-08, 13:54, said:

1-4-2-6 18 count

Wouldn't that hand have done something huge immediately after the transfer?

[gwnn]

who knows? its hard to form rational arguments around this sequence...

[kenrexford]

No one is thinking about the real problem, although gwnn is closer to the truth than anyone. The key issue is why not 4♣?

[manudude03]

your hand was 4234 with 2 club suits .

[kenrexford]

manudude03, on 2011-April-08, 14:58, said:

your hand was 4234 with 2 club suits .

No, but funny and reasonable guess.

As it was, as Dealer my hand was a tad weird. ♠xxxxx ♥AQx ♦xx ♣Axx. But, that's an aside.

[hrothgar]

kenrexford, on 2011-April-08, 15:03, said:

No, but funny and reasonable guess.

As it was, as Dealer my hand was a tad weird. ♠xxxxx ♥AQx ♦xx ♣Axx. But, that's an aside.

Back in the day, there were enormous debates over the right opening bid with 5-5 in the black suits.
I never realized that this had been extended to 5-3 hands

[gwnn]

kenrexford, on 2011-April-08, 14:57, said:

No one is thinking about the real problem, although gwnn is closer to the truth than anyone. The key issue is why not 4♣?

This is the easiest question so far. 4♣ is always gerber.

Could be 1327?

[kenberg]

OK, I'll take my shot. Can we give her maybe 4-1-2-6 shape with junky spades and the ace of hearts? She reasons that in hearts they will be in a 6-1 fit and partner will be tapped. Holding probably one spade and six hearts he probably has a couple of clubs. She figures/hopes that she can ruff a spade or two in dummy, maybe case a high heart in dummy, run her solid clubs and claim. Or something like that. If so, she had better hope that partner figures this out. An ASBAF 5H will not be good.

[manudude03]

hrothgar, on 2011-April-08, 15:21, said:

Back in the day, there were enormous debates over the right opening bid with 5-5 in the black suits.
I never realized that this had been extended to 5-3 hands

I once opened a natural 1♣ with 6-1 in the blacks . Playing speedball juniors style, had 4 of my spades amongst my clubs (uhhh club?) lol.

Anyway, the only other thing I can think of is that its "exclusion" for ♠.

[kenrexford]

gwnn, on 2011-April-08, 15:28, said:

This is the easiest question so far. 4♣ is always gerber.

Could be 1327?

Duing Ding Ding!!! We have a winner!!!

The pattern is almost exactly right, which is a bonus. 2326, with KQJ10xx in clubs.

[manudude03]

So, we're opposite a partner who could only invite game (at best!) and now we're forcing to the 5 level? great... At least bid 4♥ and if you really feel so inclined, bid 5♣ if they bid 4♠.

[kenberg]

I expect I speak for many who would say "Yes, it occurred to me that perhaps 4♣ would be Gerber but that was just too weird to take seriously". It's not that I didn't think of it, I just moved on.

Btw, what happened after the 5♣ bid?

It reminds me a bit of a partner who opened one club on a two card suit even though we had agreed that it promised three. It turned out that her hand was 4=4=2=2 and she couldn't think of what else to do. She was sure we had not discussed this situation.

[kenrexford]

kenberg, on 2011-April-09, 06:44, said:

Btw, what happened after the 5♣ bid?

5♣XX for +1000 to us. Partner dropped a reasonable trick to drop, such that we missed the chance for +1600. But, would require both of us risk the contract making.

[chasetb]

kenrexford, on 2011-April-08, 19:51, said:

Duing Ding Ding!!! We have a winner!!!

The pattern is almost exactly right, which is a bonus. 2326, with KQJ10xx in clubs.

All I have to say is "wow". This sounds like a reason that over 1♣, to make 2♣ show this type of hand, and to make 2♦ Michaels. I also can't believe that the person who transferred didn't yank 5♣X(X) to 5♥.