[AL78]

---

A 20% board, as four out of five other pairs were in 4♠, one stopped in 3♠ (there is always one). Partner thought I could have been 5-5 so chose clubs over spades. What do you think, can East take a view that I likely have more extreme distribution and correct to the spade game?

Another alternative is for me to open 2♣ starting with a game force then try to show both suits, but I don't like doing that with a very distributional two suiter, as it takes away bidding space that could be better used to get both suits and strength across, although in the event, that is largely irrelevant when the opposition barrage in hearts.

[KingCovert]

Why not double instead of 5♣?

Your partner passes with heart length, this isn't a bad thing.
Your partner bids 4NT with no minor suit preference and bad major suit holdings, given the auction.
Your partner bids 5♦ on hands where which minor suit game you play is not likely to make a difference, quite like this one, but in this case that's rather flukey.
Or, on hands like this one, your partner bids 4♠. Which is exactly what you want.

Double doesn't promise both minors by the way, it is takeout and says that defending 4♥ is wrong unless you have a stack, in which case, I'd like to penalize, and I don't want to bid past 4♠ as it could be the best spot.

[Cyberyeti]

5♠ is not a great contract, give N the ♠9 or J in exchange for a club and you're struggling on 3 rounds of diamonds, and that's with the trumps breaking.

[helene_t]

AL78, on 2020-March-12, 16:45, said:

2♣ .... but I don't like doing that with a very distributional two suiter, as it takes away bidding space .... although in the event, that is largely irrelevant when the opposition barrage in hearts.

This is actually backwards - In this auction you did get both your suits across. If you had opened 2♣, you would have to bid 4♠ to introduce your first suit.

I think all four possible choices - opening 2♣, 1♠ then double, 1♠ then 4♠ and 1♠ then 5♣ are reasonable. Maybe 4♠ is a bit better at MPs and 5♣ at IMPs.

Anyway, there's nothing your partner can do about it.

[FelicityR]

Technically, with old-fashioned (purist) Acol bidding rules - assuming Acol is what you play - partner can play you for six ♠s as with 5♣/5♠ the correct opening is 1♣. But...

...many players now open 1♠ with 5-5 black suit hands, especially using 5M systems like 2/1, SAYC and even Acol.

[msjennifer]

Sir, Here is a hand with an intriguing choice of opening bids.Technically there are only 3 losers in the hand. .Quite a few aggressive players may perhaps choose a 2C opening as the spade suit beats them all.My bid is hence 2C .In the present case as posted I would bid bid 4S and not 5C as there is no reason to think that 5S will make if partner chooses it. Responder has passed 2H bid so there is no hope of him having much useful.And one just needs a favourable break in spades and clubs break .

[miamijd]

I don't see where either E or W did anything so horribly wrong here. Sure, West might have bid 4S rather than 5C, but 5C is fine. Yes, East might have corrected back to 5S, but I think passing is OK, too.

Yes, your partner probably has six spades. With 5125, he might X. But it's not guaranteed. You can be sure he has at least 5 clubs.

You were unlucky in that your N/S opponents jammed the auction, whereas other N/S pairs may not have done so. Not every North would have bid over 1S. The hand is not good enough cardwise for 2H and not good enough trickwise for 3H vulnerable. So many Norths might have passed, in which case you get

1S 1NT (f)
3C 3D
3S 4S

Or something like that.

[Cyberyeti]

miamijd, on 2020-March-13, 10:17, said:

I don't see where either E or W did anything so horribly wrong here. Sure, West might have bid 4S rather than 5C, but 5C is fine. Yes, East might have corrected back to 5S, but I think passing is OK, too.

Yes, your partner probably has six spades. With 5125, he might X. But it's not guaranteed. You can be sure he has at least 5 clubs.

You were unlucky in that your N/S opponents jammed the auction, whereas other N/S pairs may not have done so. Not every North would have bid over 1S. The hand is not good enough cardwise for 2H and not good enough trickwise for 3H vulnerable. So many Norths might have passed, in which case you get

1S 1NT (f)
3C 3D
3S 4S

Or something like that.

Most N's I know would have bid 3♥ rather than 2, and S is raising that

[beowulf]

Personally, I think pass of 5!C is Quixotic. You have said that 5!S and 5!C are both playable contracts at the 5-level. At IMPs, it would be OK to pass 5!C. But at matchpoints? No, with Qx versus xxx, I think partner owed you a spade preference.

[pescetom]

I think I too would bid 2♣ as I'm basically only interested in diamonds control and the Q♠ here, at least at MPs.

[dsLawsd]

Some unlucky guesses here. Certainly at imps 5♣ seems perfect as you lack defense of the red suits. Depending upon who had what for dinner at matchpoints gives a tossup. I would bid 5♠
as East in case partner had the magic AKJxxx or better in spades.

[SelfGovern]

There is a lot to be said for opening 55 black hands with 1!C. If that is your agreement, it works very well here; partner knows that you have 6-5 or better because you opened 1!S.

Other hands where you are 5-5, you might even be able to play at 4!S instead of at the five level.

[nudnikbp]

North made a vulnerable overcall that deserved to be punished,but he got away with it this time and it hurt your auction.

[daxx]

You are missing Q, J, 10 and 9 ♠. I think bidding 4 ♠ is the limit for the hand. Turns out that the missing cards sat great but you can't know that while you're bidding.

[miamijd]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-13, 10:57, said:

Most N's I know would have bid 3♥ rather than 2, and S is raising that

I wonder what sort of Norths you know then

North has a 5-trick hand. You want him to overbid the hand by 4 tricks vulnerable. That deserves to get hammered.

Personally, I almost always play South or East, so I would not be among the Norths you know

[barmar]

miamijd, on 2020-March-14, 19:43, said:

I wonder what sort of Norths you know then

North has a 5-trick hand. You want him to overbid the hand by 4 tricks vulnerable. That deserves to get hammered.

Personally, I almost always play South or East, so I would not be among the Norths you know

I think the point is that 2♥ is a significant overbid, because it shows around the values of an opening hand, while 3♥ shows a weak hand. If you don't feel like preempting because of the vulnerability, then Pass is the alternative.

[Cyberyeti]

miamijd, on 2020-March-14, 19:43, said:

I wonder what sort of Norths you know then

North has a 5-trick hand. You want him to overbid the hand by 4 tricks vulnerable. That deserves to get hammered.

Personally, I almost always play South or East, so I would not be among the Norths you know

If you play weak jumps as most do round here, this is quite a good one.

2♥ is not even a possibility for us it's 3 or pass, and I'm not passing.

I'm surprised nobody was in 5♠, 5♥ is actually a good save.

[AL78]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-16, 03:00, said:

If you play weak jumps as most do round here, this is quite a good one.

2♥ is not even a possibility for us it's 3 or pass, and I'm not passing.

I'm surprised nobody was in 5♠, 5♥ is actually a good save.

I'm not. My guess is that no-one overcalled hearts, so EW had a free run to 4♠ (this sort of thing seems to happen quite frequently).

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-16, 03:00, said:

If you play weak jumps as most do round here, this is quite a good one.

2♥ is not even a possibility for us it's 3 or pass, and I'm not passing.

I'm surprised nobody was in 5♠, 5♥ is actually a good save.

I'm not keen on either 2H or 3H, vulnerable opposite a paseed-hand partner on a semi-balanced 7-count (I would want more shape - particularly a 7-card suit for 3H). I agree with Miamjid that 3H is asking to be whacked. But since it is pairs, I might consider a 2H bid, primarily to attract a lead. Yes, this should promise more, but opposite a passed hand the bid has a wider range and lead direction is important.