[bluecalm]

---

IMPs.

Everybody at the table is much better than me.
My action ? Is it clear ? What about other vulns ?

[Fluffy]

my decisions between game and slam aren't often affected by vulnerability.

If I had an agreement to show a good 5♦ hand I'd try it (direct 5♦ vs 4NT +5♦), but I think for most 4NT+5♦ shows some weird ♠-♦ 2 suiter over 4♥ (it is impossible after passing 1♥, but that would be too specific)

Barring that I will just bid 5♦

[gnasher]

4NT and then convert 5♣ to 5♦. I don't think there's any doubt about what that shows.

[gszes]

5d

not because I wouldnt love to invite slam but because the only methods we might choose are
dangerous. for ex what would you bid with


Kxxx void xxxxxxx xx
xxxxx void xxxxx Kxx
xxx void xxxxx Kxxxxx


pretty much all of these types of hands require us to bid 4n and either pass 5c or convert 5c
to 5d to show our ability to play in 2 places.

hands like this are why negative free bids have popularity. It is not all that common for there to be an
opening bid an overcall and a game forcing hand all at the same time but I digress.

[Codo]

5 ♦, I need too much for six.

[MrAce]

I would have bid 2♦ previous round if 3♦ was not available. Not as neg free bid but F1, with the intention of bidding 3♦ later. I think i will bid something like Gnasher suggested now if that is available. AK 7 times is way too good of a suit to just bid 5♦ imo.

EDIT: Sorry i thought it was AK 7 times, now i see it is 6 cards, disregard what i wrote please.

[dake50]

IMPs.

Everybody at the table is much better than me.
My action ? Is it clear ? What about other vulns ?

*** What constrained showing a 6xD to AK over 1H on previous round?
*** Free bids GF?
*** This hand can't start negX? Nor some other?
*** No Leben to limit this hand?

*** Agree this is monster offense on the given auction.
*** I'd try 4NT and convert 5C to 5D hoping that gets this strong across.

[mikeh]

I agree with Andy that there can be no doubt what 4N then 5♦ shows. Fluffy's worry about it being a weird 2-suiter involving spades is, as he notes himself, impossible....how can we hold a hand that can commit to the 5-level with spades as a suit when we couldn't even muster a negative double at the 1-level? We can't.

This hand looks perfect for this approach: too good for 5♦ and not good enough to drive to slam. It is so nice to have an easy bid for a change!

[Fluffy]

Andy and Mike seem to have it very clear, but I though the modern way was to bid 5♦ with a slam try, and 4NT with the non slam try (well I am refering to 5♥ over 4♠ actually, with diamonds oer hearts I had never seen it before, I recall 2 suiters with spades that bid this way on other context though)

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2012-October-12, 13:30, said:

Andy and Mike seem to have it very clear, but I though the modern way was to bid 5♦ with a slam try, and 4NT with the non slam try

That's a modern alternative, but the default is to play the direct 5♦ as the weaker hand.

[PhilKing]

For historical reasons I bid 5♦ - slam try of course. I believe there was an article on this in IPBM back in the mid 90s ...

5♦ via 4NT is weaker. The trouble with 4NT then 5♦ as the slam try is that partner will pick diamonds with 45m, so you plan never gets executed on precisely the hands you need it to.

4NT should be pick a minor or a bad 5♦ bid - that way partner can never cross your intentions.

[bluecalm]

I don't know anybody who would understand 4NT->5D as weakier let alone pick-up (but very good) partner.
Thanks for setting me straight on this one. I passed and it was 800 vs 1370 on other table as partner had:
AKJx x QJxx AKJx

[PhilKing]

bluecalm, on 2012-October-12, 18:30, said:

I don't know anybody who would understand 4NT->5D as weakier let alone pick-up (but very good) partner.
Thanks for setting me straight on this one. I passed and it was 800 vs 1370 on other table as partner had:
AKJx x QJxx AKJx

I would not assume a stranger would have adopted my solution yet.

The hand is a textbook example of how bidding 4NT on this hand is a fail - partner chooses diamonds, so we don't get to follow through.

[madongjun]

I PASS rather than other.

[rsteele]

Once I passed 1H I do not have a bid that shows a hand this strong. I look at this as a Leb. auction and bid 5D but do not expect partner to bid unless he should have opened 2C. Perhaps he has made a bid nearly as bad as mine.

[gnasher]

PhilKing, on 2012-October-12, 18:25, said:

For historical reasons I bid 5♦ - slam try of course. I believe there was an article on this in IPBM back in the mid 90s ...

5♦ via 4NT is weaker. The trouble with 4NT then 5♦ as the slam try is that partner will pick diamonds with 45m, so you plan never gets executed on precisely the hands you need it to.

4NT should be pick a minor or a bad 5♦ bid - that way partner can never cross your intentions.

I don't think it's as clearcut as you suggest.

If it goes
... 4NT (5♥)
partner doesn't know whether we were planning to show both minors or just diamonds. Weaker hands are more common than strong ones, so arguably our methods should concentrate on showing those accurately.

Also, if we bid 4NT with a diamond slam try and partner bids 5♦, some of the time that may be enough for us to bid 6♦ by ourselves.

[PhilKing]

gnasher, on 2012-October-13, 17:43, said:

I don't think it's as clearcut as you suggest.

If it goes
... 4NT (5♥)
partner doesn't know whether we were planning to show both minors or just diamonds. Weaker hands are more common than strong ones, so arguably our methods should concentrate on showing those accurately.

Also, if we bid 4NT with a diamond slam try and partner bids 5♦, some of the time that may be enough for us to bid 6♦ by ourselves.

If they bid 5♥ over our 4NT, when both our options are weak it doesn't matter. The difference between 4NT (pick a minor) and 5♦ weak is virtually non-existent - it's incredibly unlikely partner could give a toss. In either case partner will just double with every hand that is not a slam drive opposite a weak take-out.

When we have the slam try, we need to show it explicitly before they raise. Your method gains exactly never.

In my method 4NT is ostensibly always weak. In yours it is strong or pick a minor. So I show weak hands more accurately, as well as strong ones. You are just making my case for me.

[twoshy]

PhilKing, on 2012-October-13, 18:23, said:

If they bid 5♥ over our 4NT, when both our options are weak it doesn't matter. The difference between 4NT (pick a minor) and 5♦ weak is virtually non-existent - it's incredibly unlikely partner could give a toss. In either case partner will just double with every hand that is not a slam drive opposite a weak take-out.

When we have the slam try, we need to show it explicitly before they raise. Your method gains exactly never.

In my method 4NT is ostensibly always weak. In yours it is strong or pick a minor. So I show weak hands more accurately, as well as strong ones. You are just making my case for me.

I think what gnasher is suggesting is that partner may want to bid to slam in clubs if 4NT was based on the minors, but cannot do so in case we are weak in diamonds. Partner's hand would have to be suitable for 6D opposite a strong 5D bid, too.

(FWIW I would play it your way, and it also seems unlikely for partner to want to bid slam at this vul opposite a weak hand with the minors.)

[PhilKing]

twoshy, on 2012-October-14, 02:14, said:

I think what gnasher is suggesting is that partner may want to bid to slam in clubs if 4NT was based on the minors, but cannot do so in case we are weak in diamonds. Partner's hand would have to be suitable for 6D opposite a strong 5D bid, too.

(FWIW I would play it your way, and it also seems unlikely for partner to want to bid slam at this vul opposite a weak hand with the minors.)

I assume that's what he's suggesting too, but I'm struggling to think of a hand that loves the idea of us having diamonds with club tolerance so much that he can bid slam and yet not want to bid it opposite diamonds. ♠AKjx ♥- ♦Ax ♣AKxxxxx?

That seems a rather narrow target to play 4NT in a way that simply does not work. And it's the same or worse in all the related sequences.

[gnasher]

Quote

The difference between 4NT (pick a minor) and 5♦ weak is virtually non-existent - it's incredibly unlikely partner could give a toss

What about when partner will bid slam opposite a weak hand with diamonds, but not opposite a weak hand with both minors? AKJx - Axxx AKxxx, for example.

Quote

Your method

I didn't say it was my method.