[jillybean]

First time in the club for a while, playing with a fellow Kiwi, we had a top 59% game.
No matter where I come, there are always hands to review.

---

MP

[mw64ahw]

I'd Pass

[mikeh]

Close. I’d bid with the diamond 10. Without it, I pass

[Huibertus]

If you can be sure partner will always describe his hand accurately before making a quantitative invite with non 4333 hands without a 4 card major, so you know how to evaluate your own hand, then he is 4333 without a 4 card major and this is a pass.

If you aren't sure it is impossible to decide as he might well have a source of tricks like a 5 card minor that makes 6 cold, in which case pass and 6NT are equally bad gambles.

[Cyberyeti]

Huibertus, on 2025-August-05, 04:22, said:

If you can be sure partner will always describe his hand accurately before making a quantitative invite with non 4333 hands without a 4 card major, so you know how to evaluate your own hand, then he is 4333 without a 4 card major and this is a pass.

If you aren't sure it is impossible to decide as he might well have a source of tricks like a 5 card minor that makes 6 cold, in which case pass and 6NT are equally bad gambles.

I have the ability to put the cube back to partner so I bid 5N to show a decent but not stellar 16 and let partner look at his shape and intermediates and decide (yes he can have 5m).

If you put a gun to my head and said 4 or 6, I'd bid 6.

[eagles123]

I think it's a clear accept. We have 16, which already puts our hand at above average, with most 15-17 NT's being 15. 3 Aces can hardly be a bad thing. Sure, Qx clubs isn't ideal, but may well fill in partners suit. Not saying it's guaranteed to make, but I do think it's pretty clear to bid 6N here.

[pescetom]

I would Pass, I'm only barely tempted. Yes, the Aces and 4432 make it a good 16, but the red suits without intermediates and the clubs Qx are negatives.

[jillybean]

I like the 5N pass the decision back to partner treatment. Is a cue bid/4N probing for the grand?

[fred]

I think this is a clear accept. Being 4432 instead of 4333 is a massive plus.

It would be nice to cater to the possibility of 6D on a 4-4 fit rather than just blasting 6NT. How exactly to do that is a matter of partnership. For example, you could try this over 4NT:

- 5x is an accept with a strong 4-card suit (in x)
- 6x is an accept with at least a reasonable 5-card suit (in x)
- 5NT is an accept that allows partner to suggest a trump suit. You could do this with the actual hand and, if partner bids 6C, bid 6D next.

(not suggesting this is "optimal", but for me at least it is intuitive and easy to remember, partly because I like to play that 5NT is almost always a choice-of-slams in non-Blackwood auctions)

With a non-expert partner I would be unwilling to bid anything other than 6NT without prior discussion.

[WasWinM]

Absent decent spot cards and with a lame duck doubleton I’m downgrading to pass.
Edit: Just read Fred’s post and admit I hadn’t even considered this hand in light of a suited slam. Quite an eye opener.

[mikeh]

Part of my reluctance to accept may arise from methods. We play, in my regular partnership, that 1N 4S is a 4N bid with 4=4 minors. The lack of stayman and the lack of a 4S bid means that partner s probably 5332 or 4333 with a minor. Unless he has 5 diamonds, I’m not enthused about this hand.

[jillybean]

Liking the Aces but otherwise a flat, quacky hand, I passed.

[fred]

Big question: Does it matter how often you "upgrade"?

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2025-August-05, 08:49, said:

I like the 5N pass the decision back to partner treatment.

FWIW, I dislike generic pass-back decisions after an invite: they smack of blame-transfer (not to even mention UI opportunities).

jillybean, on 2025-August-05, 08:49, said:

Is a cue bid/4N probing for the grand?

4N is insufficient. How could a cue bid be probing for the grand after a quantitative invite to slam opposite 1NT?

fred, on 2025-August-05, 09:12, said:

It would be nice to cater to the possibility of 6D on a 4-4 fit rather than just blasting 6NT. How exactly to do that is a matter of partnership. For example, you could try this over 4NT:

- 5x is an accept with a strong 4-card suit (in x)
- 6x is an accept with at least a reasonable 5-card suit (in x)
- 5NT is an accept that allows partner to suggest a trump suit. You could do this with the actual hand and, if partner bids 6C, bid 6D next.

This makes a whole lot more sense to me, especially the idea that 5NT should allow partner to suggest a trump suit.
I currently play (as suggested by sfi) that 5x is a conditional accept with a 5-card suit, casts doubt on 6NT but not on 5NT or 6x.
Even if we play it as 4-card, not sure that our diamonds are "strong" here.

[jillybean]

fred, on 2025-August-05, 14:02, said:

Big question: Does it matter how often you "upgrade"?

How willing I am to upgrade will, in time, influence partner's invitational style. This partnership has very little experience.
With others, I would say we invite conservatively and accept aggressively. With this knowledge, I'd be in 6N. It was close.

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2025-August-05, 14:41, said:

4N is insufficient. How could a cue bid be probing for the grand after a quantitative invite to slam opposite 1NT?

1N 4N
Pass
6N accept
5N decent 16, nothing more specific.
Can we get more specific with the entire 5 level?

edit. yes, grand was an overbid

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2025-August-05, 15:13, said:

1N 4N
Pass
6N accept
5N decent 16, nothing more specific.
Can we get more specific with the entire 5 level?

Yes we can of course get more specific with the entire 5 level.
Fred offered one suggestion, which does not wholly convince me although I do like his 5N.
Previous discussion came up with other schemes, I like and play that of sfi (5x suggests that 6x may be possible and 5N safe if not).

[fred]

jillybean, on 2025-August-05, 14:46, said:

How willing I am to upgrade will, in time, influence partner's invitational style. This partnership has very little experience.
With others, I would say we invite conservatively and accept aggressively. With this knowledge, I'd be in 6N. It was close.

4NT says: Do you have a minimum or a maximum?

The more your partnership tends to upgrade, the less you need for your hand to be considered a maximum.

[HardVector]

I am assuming that the quantity that is being evaluated is 15-17. If you are using 16-18, it's a clear pass. I usually lean towards bidding more when I have the middle value, but I will evaluate to determine if I should downgrade. You have 3 aces. Aces are undervalued, so your hand is stronger than a straight hcp should indicate. You also have 3 quacks, which are overvalued. So that is a wash with the aces. One J is compensated by having a ten with it, and the other is accompanied by a 4 card suit. While these are not enough to get giddy about, they are positives in the hand. The Q is Qx, on the face of it, this is a negative. If you were playing in suit it's a big negative. A subtlety to the auction, however, is partner did NOT bid Stayman or go looking for a major suit fit. This tends to imply a minor suit oriented hand. Partner's likely suit is clubs, and if partner has clubs, then the Q in that suit helps partner.

Overall, my initial lean was toward bidding on, and there were several indicators that said my hand was better.

[johnu]

HardVector, on 2025-August-05, 19:02, said:

If you are using 16-18, it's a clear pass.

True, but does anybody play a 16-18 NT these days?