[straube]

All vul imps, expert opps

1S (4H) 4S (5D*)
P (5H) 5S P
P (6D)

Is it

1. an invitation to sacrifice against 6S?
2. an offer to play?


*confirms heart fit, lead directional/fit showing

[madongjun]

If 4H was preempted,I think 6D is

Quote

an invitation to sacrifice against 6S

.

[Free]

So opps stopped at 5♠ and now we're inviting to sacrifice against slam, all red? Seems like a very narrow target to me (grand going off at most 2). On the other hand, 5NT is also available, so you can use both bids to make a distinction.

[ArtK78]

6♦ is Drury.

Clearly, the 6♦ bidder is not worried about the opps bidding a slam. And 6♦ cannot be lead directing, as he is on lead against spades (I don't think he is setting the table for a diamond lead against a possible 6NT contract). So 6♦ is a choice of contracts. Responder can pass or correct, but responder is NOT being consulted on whether to sacrifice against 6♠. If the 6♦ bidder intends to bid 7 over 6, he will do so (perhaps the 6♦ bidder believes that his side is taking at least 11 tricks in a red suit contract). Otherwise, he is on his own.

If 6♦ is not a choice of contracts, you will find out when the opps double 6♦ and partner runs to 6♥. But the important point is that partner is in control of the auction once he bids 6♦.

[jjbrr]

A save against 5S?

[PhilKing]

If you have to ask, then it does not exist.

[Fluffy]

PhilKing, on 2013-July-24, 08:57, said:

If you have to ask, then it does not exist.

I have a better rule, if you have to ask then it fits whatever meaning you can think about, this is good because we now know that 6♦ is both a real suit and a lead against 6♠.

[CSGibson]

Anything other than an offer to play when you are in a situation where it has been bid semi-naturally and when you haven't discussed alternative treatments just doesn't seem reasonable to me. Improvising is one thing, but expecting partner to read this as an invitation to sacrifice is taking it way too far.

[PhilKing]

The reason it does not exist is not because it's so hard to work out that it is natural. It's because it's just pseudo-scientific tourette's aimed to help the opposition bid and defend perfectly.

[benlessard]

Your probably going down too much but you hope partner is going to play it instead of you.

[inquiry]

All vulnerable at imps. The 4♥ bid was "weak", but we are vul. Expect what, rule of 2/3 or close to that.

5♦ was fit non-jump, so the idea would be to help the 4♥ bidder decide what to do over 5♠? Probably not (other than lead a diamond). Surely it was not to suggest a save over 5♠. The saying goes the five level belongs to the opponents. Here you got them to 5♠ and the hand was being passed out at imps. South didn't make a slam try over 5♦, he just "signed off." Now, when the opponents bid 5♠ he sticks his vulnerable neck out again. The last thing he wants is partner to save over 6♠. He could have passed 5♠.

Someone is playing a deep game here if these are experts. I suspect south is looking at a good double fit (Well duh) with enough spades that opposite his right hand opponent bidding 5♠ now that he has convinced himself that his partner is void in spades. Perhaps he himself is void in clubs and he thinks now 12 tricks has materialized.

[benlessard]

IMO its clear that 5D is a lead directing raise and doesnt suggest a save (on the contrary it tend to suggest we have a shot at putting 5S down). I would bid 5D with a D void or a stiff A all the time. Its simply a matter of frequency and of importance. At imps putting a game down just way more profitable than finding a sac.

[ArtK78]

Deleted.