[Hanoi5]

---

MP's. Do you agree with the first action? What do you bid at this point? What do you expect partner to have? Would your answer to the last question change at a diferent vulnerability?

[DJNeill]

X fine. I think 4S is a bunch of spades with a bad hand, more spades than 3S. I Pass. The vulnerability does not make a big difference to me here.

[TylerE]

X and Pass. 4♠ shows a decent hand for me, but what I have _isn't_ the nuts. My general policy is to give up on slam when opponents open and respond unless I can count 12 tricks. On this hand, opposite the wrong hand I might not to be able to count 10 - something like Axxxxx xx xx KQx

[Hanoi5]

So, what would you bid as advancer with:

♠Axxxxx
♥KJx
♦x
♣Qxx

or:

♠Axxxxx
♥x
♦Kxx
♣Txx

[ahydra]

I would have bid 1D, but that's just a style thing, I guess. There aren't many HCPs left for partner to hold so I guess he must have some shape with long spades. The problem is he's left us no room to explore safely - if he has shortage in diamonds, great; if in clubs, not so great.

ahydra

[aguahombre]

There are magic 7 or 8-counts my partner might have where slam has a chance. I won't be finding or looking for them.

[Cyberyeti]

TylerE, on 2013-October-08, 21:20, said:

X and Pass. 4♠ shows a decent hand for me, but what I have _isn't_ the nuts. My general policy is to give up on slam when opponents open and respond unless I can count 12 tricks. On this hand, opposite the wrong hand I might not to be able to count 10 - something like Axxxxx xx xx KQx

You can count 10 opposite that, you can't count 11.

I think partner shows a slightly better (in terms of offence) hand than that. Axxxxxx, (x, Kx), xxx is very much in the frame, but so is Axxxxx, xxx, x, KQJ. You are going to get a heart lead which may not be good news.

I would have overcalled 1♦ but it's very much a matter of style.

I think I pass 4♠, but would be tempted to go on.

[billw55]

ahydra, on 2013-October-09, 05:59, said:

There aren't many HCPs left for partner to hold so I guess he must have some shape with long spades. The problem is he's left us no room to explore safely

... and I trust him to have done so for a reason. Clear pass.

[ggwhiz]

A second source of tricks gives reason for optimism ie. reverse the majors or put (at least) the K♠ in the diamond suit so you can run both of them.

Even then, bad policy to punish partner for taking an optimistic view with long spades and shape. They shut you down without a cue for a reason.

[Fluffy]

ahydra, on 2013-October-09, 05:59, said:

I would have bid 1D, but that's just a style thing

I consider it a serious error, but that's just my opinion.

[rmnka447]

Double is fine. You have decent ♦s, but not so great that you want to emphasize them versus the majors. It's always a judgment call on these type of hands (4-3 majors, 5 card minor) whether to double or overcall.

I'm probably passing the 4 ♠ bid, but not without some squirming. You have controls in all the outside suits, but not quite enough to be sure 5 ♠ is a reasonable contract.

Partner's 4 ♠ promises ♠s and little else -- wouldn't be surprised to see partner with ♠ Axxxxxx and out.

Another issue if you do proceed is what does a new suit bid mean, 5 ♦ here, after the 4 ♠ call. Is it a control bid in support of ♠ or showing the big ♦ overcall hand?

My take is that it should show the control. With the big ♦ hand you have to accept that partner's spade bid has preempted you out of showing the hand. Partner's long ♠s will still be worth something at a ♠ contract, but may not contribute anything at a ♦ contract.

In any case, it one of those things that need some partnership discussion.

[cherdano]

Hanoi5, on 2013-October-09, 05:43, said:

So, what would you bid as advancer with:

♠Axxxxx
♥KJx
♦x
♣Qxx

or:

♠Axxxxx
♥x
♦Kxx
♣Txx

2♣ followed by 4♠ (unless partner makes a bid that indicates a strong non-takeout double, such as a jump to a new suit.