[el mister]

---

Playing 4c M and a strong NT

Got a bit lucky declaring this one the other night - how do you rate 5♣ here? Wildly anti-percentage or more like it pays to be an optimist at the bridge table?

What's your bid at this stage and how does it change with the vulnerability?

[gszes]

el mister, on 2014-May-14, 04:00, said:

---

Playing 4c M and a strong NT

Got a bit lucky declaring this one the other night - how do you rate 5♣ here? Wildly anti-percentage or more like it pays to be an optimist at the bridge table?

What's your bid at this stage and how does it change with the vulnerability?

the question seems a bit unclear the bidding is over so nothing else can be bid unless
you are asking about xx instead of pass. 5C seems reasonable no guarantees but you
have extra values shortness in spades and p showing the minors should not be dead minimum
I would not xx if that is the question.

[el mister]

Thks - to be more clear I was interested in the 5♣ bid. Is it sound and how might you bid differently according to the vulnerability.

[whereagles]

5♣ seems ok to me.

You got extras, a useful singleton, fitting honors in the minors. Unless pard comes up with a totally unsuitable hand, the contract should make.

Doubling 4♠ would probably be safer, but there's a fair chance the penalty won't compensate, so 5♣ sounds ok to me. I find it really a matter of style (provided pard does have the decency of showing up with at least 44 minors, as he should LOL).

[Fluffy]

5♣ is ok, but double will be a strong contender the less penalty oriented you play it.

[jdgalt]

I don't feel all that good about this hand at the five level. At least in my partnerships, pard has shown only 4-4 minors and about 8 count. But (before my 5C bid, if I make it) we haven't bid above the one level, so pass isn't forcing; I have to guess or go home. I'll go ahead and bid 5C at IMPs, or non-vul at matchpoints. Vulnerable at matchpoints I'd rather pass.