[l milne]

---

3♠ was Michaels, showing hearts and a minor 55+.

[Fluffy]

I'm a bidder, 4NT at IMPs cos I think the minor might play better

[l milne]

And at MP 5♥ over 5♣?

[dake50]

Is 5D pass/5H? Or lead-direct? Or Q-bid?
That puts partner into the picture if 5S.
If 4NT as pick minor, what is 5D over 5C? Q-bid on to 5H/6C?

A&E should have these agreements.
I'm out since I already used X as "stuff" but 2 losers in their suit.

[Fluffy]

At MPs 5♥ might get a quick sacrifice from some opponents, its a kind of table feeling, I would prefer to be able to show that I wanna play 5♦ if partner has them but 5♥ otherwise.

[Hanoi5]

5♥ for me

[nige1]

l milne, on 2010-December-01, 18:04, said:

♠ was Michaels, showing hearts and a minor 55+.
' class="handviewer">

---

IMO 4N = 10, _P = 9, 5♥ = 8.

[mikeh]

Red v white at imps, partner forced to the 4 level, so something like x AQxxx xx AKxxx looks like the least he'd have. On a bad day, x AQxxx KQJxx xx, I guess...I mean, I don't like 3♠ on that hand, but I don't like 3♥ very much either, and passing is out of the question for me.

On the first layout, we have to be bidding, 'cos we make most of the time (and since he will often have better hearts it will often be frigid). On the second, we will be failing but not by much, and we won't get rich on defence.

So we need to bid.

I opt for 5♥rather than 4N, since I don't think we are likely to lose control in hearts....if he has x AQJxx xx AKxxx, a 4-1 break won't worry us at all.

And I am worried that 4N then 5♥ could usefully be used to suggest slam interest....I think Frances wrote some time ago that about this kind of sequence, and it seemed to make sense to me, especially red v white when the 4♠ call could and often will be on nothing beyond some spade length and a little shape.

[Fluffy]

I think 4NT might suggest slam interest if you have that agreement, but what about 5♦?

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2010-December-02, 14:34, said:

I think 4NT might suggest slam interest if you have that agreement, but what about 5♦?

If it is unmistakeably pass or correct, then I think 5♦ is the better call for several reasons. If there is any doubt about whether this could be 7 or 8 good diamonds, and partner thinks pass is ok with 1=5=2=5, then 5♥ seems more prudent. So it depends on how well you know your partnership agreements.