Thanks for the opinions. Bidding: 2
♣-2
♠-p-3
♠, ?. We play:
Pass after intervention over 2
♣ = 0-4HCP
2
♣2
♦2NT = 23-24HCP
I like Luke Warm's simple approach to bid 4
♠ and then 6
♥ over partner's 5
♥. Even opposite
♥xxxx slam looks a reasonable prospect. However, it would have been better had the contract been right sided.
The downside of bidding 4 of a suit is that partner would expect a single suited hand of at least 6 cards so would not correct.
At the table I doubled (no one voted for this) although I see the danger of partner passing as minimal and if he does it may well give us the only plus score say QJ10xx, xx,xx,xxxx. After the double partner bid 4
♥ and 12 tricks rolled in after a spade lead. I think after this I should have bid 5
♥ or possibly bashed 6. Anothe thing in favour of double is that if partner has diamonds it does give him the choice of bidding 4 or 5 according to distribution. Over 5
♦ I would go 6
♦.
Pass seems to have the same benefits as a double but without the downside of a possible penalty pass from partner. But wouldn't partner think that I had a balanced 23-24 and pass with a balanced yarb?
inquiry Posted on Nov 17 2004, 03:12 PM
This hand looks very familiar. When I held it, or one like it, I bid 4♥ with the clever plan of carrying on to 5♦ over their possible 4♠ sacrafice. If this is the hand, what happened to me was that when LHO bid 4♠, my partner bid 5♥. How could I, given parnters raise to five, not bid 6? Sadly on 11 tricks.
Upon reflection, 4♥ wasn't horrible, but a forcing pass here or a creative 4NT (pick a suit), where I pull 5♣ to 5♦ seems about right. If partner has a little something after this we get to 6, and if not, we should be in five of our best fit.
Sorry the quote is not boxed. Difficult to see how a slam would fail if partner voluntarily bids 5
♥ ove 4
♠. Also if 4NT is pick a suit, how is this different from 4
♠?