[StevenG]

---

Club game, MPs. Mediocre field, decent opps. All playing Acol(ish). What's best here?

[PhilKing]

Five Diamonds.

[sfi]

I presume 2H wouldn't be fit-showing?

[Trinidad]

PhilKing, on 2015-March-21, 08:49, said:

Five Diamonds.

No matter how big you write it, it is a very narrow target to aim for. 3NT, 4♥ and 6♦ may be better contracts.

I won't answer what to bid, unless I know more about the methods, but I could imagine bidding 1♥ (F1), 2♣ (only forcing bid), 2♥ (fit showing, F1), 3♥ (fit showing, GF), 3♠ (splinter), or 4♠ (void).

Rik

[StevenG]

Trinidad, on 2015-March-21, 13:17, said:

I won't answer what to bid, unless I know more about the methods, but I could imagine bidding 1♥ (F1), 2♣ (only forcing bid), 2♥ (fit showing, F1), 3♥ (fit showing, GF), 3♠ (splinter), or 4♠ (void).

No fit-showing heart bids. 3♠ should, in theory, be a splinter. Whether partner would read it as such is another matter. I'm pretty sure 4♠ as a void would not be understood. We have only played together a few times this year (after a six-months partnership a few years ago), so it's mainly a case of trying to avoid misunderstandings.

[fromageGB]

The danger of 1♥ is that opener may complete his reverse into spades, and wake up responder whose spade holding was in too weak a hand to initially respond. At this vulnerability I am not sure I would be happy defending 5♠ doubled, so I think I prefer an immediate 5♦. I want to play in diamonds rather than hearts, because I expect to be ruffing a few spades.

Going slamming with 4♥/♠/NT seems too optimistic.

[Taiwan_up]

With pass of E, it seems that you have high-level contract when you have 10+diamonds and distributed hand. But you need step bids to find the best contract, like slams. So 1H first.

[fourdad]

StevenG, on 2015-March-21, 13:28, said:

No fit-showing heart bids. 3♠ should, in theory, be a splinter. Whether partner would read it as such is another matter. I'm pretty sure 4♠ as a void would not be understood. We have only played together a few times this year (after a six-months partnership a few years ago), so it's mainly a case of trying to avoid misunderstandings.

There is no way to avoid misunderstandings without solid partnership agreements.

[lamford]

Gregory: "The dog did nothing in the night-time."
Holmes: "That was the curious incident."

Where are all the spades? It seems most likely that they are something like 4-4-5 clockwise round the table, and East has a bad hand. I plugged in what we know, crudely, to Bridge Analyzer, and had the following table for 1000 deals. I am not sure how to tabulate it correctly for this site (and the help button did not seem to help):

Ctract 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
W C 296 171 37 10 0 0 0
N D 0 12 99 333 406 122 28
S H 75 200 315 254 125 18 2
W S 209 321 280 93 16 0 0

Essentially, 5D will make around 55.6% of the time, and West will have a cheap enough save in spades 71% of the time. Of course, some of the time this will be a phantom, but some of the time West will misjudge. I think by far and way the best practical approach is to bid 5♦. This will probably end the auction, and may well go one off, but that will not necessarily be a bad MP result as the opponents may be able to make 4S. Going slowly will help them judge, as would any fit jump in hearts.

[PhilKing]

Trinidad, on 2015-March-21, 13:17, said:

No matter how big you write it, it is a very narrow target to aim for. 3NT, 4♥ and 6♦ may be better contracts.

I won't answer what to bid, unless I know more about the methods, but I could imagine bidding 1♥ (F1), 2♣ (only forcing bid), 2♥ (fit showing, F1), 3♥ (fit showing, GF), 3♠ (splinter), or 4♠ (void).

Rik

That's the reason I did not go for 1♥ - I was really scared it would go all pass.

Seriously, can you ever really envisage playing this in 3NT or 4♥? If we have a double fit in the reds, they can outbid us with Four Spades, so if we have have to go to the five level, it should be in our longest suit.

I strongly believe the best approach is to just bid our most likely game and make it difficult for the opponents. I think there is a pretty good chance this will give lefty a real headache. I like scientific bidding as much as most, but this is not the time to go slow (although you could sell me a walk the dog 3♦).

[jodepp]

So much depends on methods available that the answer to 'what's best' is very subjective.

If one isn't sure how 3♠ will be interpreted, and a fit-jump isn't available, I think an immediate blast of 5♦ seems practical. The opponents seem to have a spade fit and just in case they have a cheap save (or make) I'll make 'em guess at the five level.

I slightly prefer the fit-jump to the splinter if both are available, but would hardly object if someone else preferred otherwise.

[case_no_6]

Constructively, a fit jump in hearts (to 3H) - if available - seems best in terms describing this hand's values, but I am not sure this the time for science. One of the primary advantages of fit jump bids is that they aid in competitive decision making, especially when there is a double fit. But, if there is a double fit in the red suits, the opponents must have a huge (10+ card) spade fit. (I assume that with 4 spades, 3 hearts, and 5 diamonds, partner would have made a Takeout Double of 1C.)

Regardless, I still am worried about the spade suit. Unless partner is sitting on 5 spades with 6 diamonds, the opponents have at least a 9 card spade fit. What's more, I think that, with a bad holding like Qxx in clubs among my values, the chances of slam are pretty remote. (If partner is 5S-6D, my hand should not be that good since the void is very likely to duplicate partner's spade values.) In any case, whether partner is 5S-6D or something a bit more usual (probably including 4 spades in which case partner is unlikely to have 3 hearts since he failed to make that Takeout Double), I think 5D has merit. It may make and, even if it doesn't, it is likely not going off more than 1 while they may be able to make a spade part-score. It's preemptive value - even at this vulnerability - should not be discounted completely.

All in all, I think 5D is the best practical bid, and it has a decent chance of being the winning bid.

[zillahandp]

Eh 1ht next?

[mikeh]

This is a no-brainer to me, for much the same reasons as were articulated by PK.

We don't belong in hearts, and if we do, then E-W have about 10+ spades. West will definitely bid over 1♥ if we have a big heart fit, since he is short in diamonds, and is unlikely to be long in hearts.

It is entirely possible that the opps have 10+ spades between them, with East having a very weak hand. I don't care how weak it is: if we have hearts, he will have a sh*tload of spades and some shape and will never let us play 4♥.

So if we belong in hearts, we are almost never being allowed to play in 4♥, so why bother? It is extremely unlikely that we can make 5♥ and fail in 5♦, and while this is mps, getting to play 5♦ rates to score better than having to guess what to do over 4♠ or even 5♠.

The odds are, of course, that we don't have a heart fit. Partner rates to hold some spade length, and if he does he would usually double with hearts as well.

The way I see it is:

If we have hearts, bidding them is an invitation to the opps to bid at least 4♠, and we will hate it

If we don't have hearts, bidding them is a waste of time, while also perhaps getting the opps to spades

So 5♦, which we expect to make most of the time, seems clear. Plus, it maximizes the chances of the opps doing something silly, which is rarely bad for our side.

[neilkaz]

Another vote to blast to 5♦ as I am going to have to bid it over 4♠ anyhow so I'll bid it now.

[StevenG]

I would have bid 5♦ in a strong field, but I was concerned about the absence of spades, and unsure whether I should be preempting or trying to bid constructively. I tried 4♦ to try to get a bit more idea of what was going on (knowing that I can usually get away with it at this level). LHO bid 5♣ and partner raised to 5♦ where we stopped. Partner made 13 tricks.

---

Obviously, you might not like my 4♦. Other than that, we both thought we might have bid it badly, which, given the result, is why I asked the question.

[mikeh]

StevenG, on 2015-March-23, 17:01, said:

I would have bid 5♦ in a strong field, but I was concerned about the absence of spades, and unsure whether I should be preempting or trying to bid constructively. I tried 4♦ to try to get a bit more idea of what was going on (knowing that I can usually get away with it at this level). LHO bid 5♣ and partner raised to 5♦ where we stopped. Partner made 13 tricks.

---

Obviously, you might not like my 4♦. Other than that, we both thought we might have bid it badly, which, given the result, is why I asked the question.

I have no idea what 4♦ should look like, but it shouldn't be this hand. I would take it as extreme shape, without much in the way of hcp.

3=3=7=0 weak, maybe.

[aguahombre]

Obvious 7D bid by North over 5D Although a 3S splinter might have worked this time, it still sucks in theory because of all the things PK and Mike said about giving the opponents room to get their theoretical spade fit into the picture.