[Trinidad]

One from yesterday evening. You hold (IMPs, all vul):

---

What should partner's hand look like?
What do you bid now?

If you're interested: Any comments on the bidding?

Rik

[rhm]

Partner has (near) solid ♠ with first round control in ♣, likely the ace and is missing control in ♦.
If he would miss ♣ control he should have bid 5♠ earlier or at least not have cue-bid ♣
So Pass.

I would probably not open your hand but on this forum my view is certainly a small minority.

Rainer Herrmann

[whereagles]

AKQxxxx
x
AKx
xx

[gszeszycki]

agree with RHM

P hand should look similar to

AKxxxxxxxx
void
xx
A

or

AKQxxxxxx
void
xx
AK

[Fluffy]

My first impression was the same as Rainer's, partner lacks diamond control. However with ♦A and 2 small clubs he might wanna bid the same way so its a bit confusing, but there is a small clue to give the solution, partner didn't wanna risk a double in 3 clubs wich should be his standard way to force, that must be because he is very short in clubs, not in diamonds.

If we play support doubles IMO we should had bid 4♠ the round before as 4♣ says pick a major, and we have the most expected lenght in spades, but the minimum in hearts (althou suit quality has somethng to say as well)

Trinidad, on 2011-January-21, 04:52, said:

Paint partner's hand

My painting skills are awful, but I'll try

[Trinidad]

Fluffy, on 2011-January-21, 07:15, said:

My first impression was the same as Rainer's, partner lacks diamond control. However with ♦A and 2 small clubs he might wanna bid the same way so its a bit confusing, but there is a small clue to give the solution, partner didn't wanna risk a double in 3 clubs wich should be his standard way to force, that must be because he is very short in clubs, not in diamonds.

If we play support doubles IMO we should had bid 4♠ the round before as 4♣ says pick a major, and we have the most expected lenght in spades, but the minimum in hearts (althou suit quality has somethng to say as well)

We were not playing support doubles.

Quote

My painting skills are awful, but I'll try

I can easily spot that you come from a country with a great history in painting:

El Greco, Velázques, Goya, Picasso, Dali, ... Fluffy

Rik

[han]

4C showed slam interest, either a single suiter or spades and hearts. A direct jump to 5S would have denied a club control, so partner has shown a club control.

I don't think that partner has shown or denied a diamond control. Our hand is strong in context, our doubleton spade can't be a disappointment, and we have tricks. A possible hand for partner could be AKJxxxx xx AJ Ax.

[mtvesuvius]

AJxxxxx
xx
AKxx
-

Would be my guess, however I never am confident about the meaning of 5 level jumps in general. I would pass, the fact that I lack first and second round controls in both minors probably means that bidding on is wrong. I also don't have any trump honours, which doesn't help much. I think regardless of what 5♠ is, I would pass.

LOL at passing this hand in first chair btw

[Fluffy]

adam & han, ain't your hands a 4♠ rebid over 4♥?, this has to show some slam interest, I mean, 5♠ must be something specific, since 4♠ is also a natural slam try.

[MrAce]

Agree with Rainer's paint.

[mfa1010]

I don't see why this sequence should communicate anything specific about a missing ♦-control?! What could partner have done instead if he had one?

For me 5♠ is a natural slam try with a strong suit, because he is bidding 5♠ opposite a potential misfit. It shows a club control because he could have bid 5♠ directly without one.

[Trinidad]

mfa1010, on 2011-January-21, 12:29, said:

I don't see why this sequence should communicate anything specific about a missing ♦-control?! What could partner have done instead if he had one?

For me 5♠ is a natural slam try with a strong suit, because he is bidding 5♠ opposite a potential misfit. It shows a club control because he could have bid 5♠ directly without one.

Those were my thoughts exactly. (We should play together.) My partner had the hand that I gave. The whole deal was:

---

I held the North hand. I felt that my 5♠ bid was a bit of an underbid, but it would have been possible for South to hold some wasted values in the club suit. I tried to paint the picture of a slam try with a club control, hoping that partner would be able to envision that it was a singleton. (With a void, I would have bid 5♣ instead of 4♣.)

He did "see" the singleton and based on that (and his three quick tricks in hearts) he bid 6♠. East started with a top club and continued clubs, so I could claim.

East, a quick learning junior who should not be playing with West, shrugged his shoulders and said: "Nothing I could do about it."
South, my partner and a wise guy, was quick to point out that a heart switch would have broken communications with dummy, defeating the slam.
Now West started to berate East for ignoring his signal at trick 1. "I discouraged the clubs! It was obvious to switch to hearts!"
I didn't say a word, but was thinking: "If it was so obvious to you that he should switch to hearts, why didn't you signal with the ♣Q?" while I put the next board on the table.

Rik

[Siegmund]

Apparently quite a lot depends on how one interprets the 4C bid.

I took 4C as a generic big-hand forcing bid, and the leap to 5S as clearly saying "I am afraid of club losers for slam." My first guess would be almost identical to whereagle's (and I autopass 5S as south with xx in clubs) though the possibility of North having only one club loser but not having room to ask about a slow diamond loser or something crossed my mind, so I wouldn't be in a rush to say North misbid on the actual cards.

[MrAce]

1 thing i do not understand, is it kinda sin or something emberassing to ask Aces with 4NT with the hands some of you constructed ? And the original hand ? (Excluding Rainer's view and those who believed pd didnt have solid ♠)

Kit Woolsey would say, as he always does when commenting in vugraph "What do you call a suit AKQxxxxx ? "

It is trump !

AKQxxxxx
x
Axx
x

When partner opens at 1 level, ragardless of whatever, i would think people will just bid 4NT (that asks aces not RKCB since responder has ways to set a suit as trump, at least in my pdship) and ask Kings and bid whatever they wanna bid. But no, that doesn't look very expert i think for some of us. Some may argue that learning aces and kings may not % 100 solve the problem, but i still believe it is way more effective than 1♠ followed by a cue and followed by 5♠.

This reminded me my exwife, i was teaching her bridge and the topic was 2♣ strong openings. So i gave her the hand AKQJTxxxxx A A A and asked what do u open ? She said 2♣ !!!!

[Trinidad]

MrAce, on 2011-January-22, 01:16, said:

This reminded me my exwife, i was teaching her bridge and the topic was 2♣ strong openings. So i gave her the hand AKQJTxxxxx A A A and asked what do u open ? She said 2♣ !!!!

Seems like an excellent bid to me.

Rik

[cherdano]

Siegmund, on 2011-January-21, 14:18, said:

Apparently quite a lot depends on how one interprets the 4C bid.

I took 4C as a generic big-hand forcing bid, and the leap to 5S as clearly saying "I am afraid of club losers for slam." My first guess would be almost identical to whereagle's (and I autopass 5S as south with xx in clubs) though the possibility of North having only one club loser but not having room to ask about a slow diamond loser or something crossed my mind, so I wouldn't be in a rush to say North misbid on the actual cards.

A direct jump to 5♠ over 3♣ shows a slam try with 2 quick club losers. So whatever you think the actual sequence shows, it can't be this.