[Echognome]

Scoring: IMP

1♦ - (P) - 4♠ - (P);
?

---

Anything to think about here?

[fromageGB]

Yes

Like - what on earth does that mean.

[jdonn]

Pass?! Partner has something like KQJTxxx of spades and out. Even if he has the ace we still have two heart losers to worry about playing in diamonds, and he certainly won't have solid spades.

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Feb 12 2010, 12:47 PM, said:

Pass?! Partner has something like KQJTxxx of spades and out. Even if he has the ace we still have two heart losers to worry about playing in diamonds, and he certainly won't have solid spades.

Well he won't have the ♠T (as we have it), but you came pretty darn close to his actual holding.

[jdonn]

Amazing, partner made a really descriptive bid therefore I knew almost exactly what he had!

[Echognome]

Well, here is the link to the actual hand (don't look if you don't want a spoiler):

http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer...2896-1265956183

As you can see, 5♦ is the place you want to be.

So, the question is how do we think the other 3 suits might be distributed. For example, switch the length in the red suits and spades will play better (although both contracts will be off).

Also, as I mentioned in the OP, maybe there's not much to think about after all.

[matmat]

other table found 5D and felt very uncomfortable about its prospects.

[jdonn]

Even if partner's diamonds were xx instead of Jx then 5♦ would be down on a trump lead or switch. Obviously there is a danger here of them taking clubs if they get one round of trumps out, but we might have Qxx of clubs or something, we might have the spade ace, they might lead a heart, we might have a singleton or doubleton club. I still think it's silly to raise the level on a total guess, obviously diamonds is most likely to be partner's short suit.

[pooltuna]

Echognome, on Feb 12 2010, 01:57 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

1♦ - (P) - 4♠ - (P);
?

---

Anything to think about here?

nah just bid 6♠ maybe that will guarantee in the future that he holds the hand he is bidding (assuming he is not)

[PhantomSac]

Really clear pass

[awm]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a diamond lead beats 5♦?

Declarer can ruff one heart, but then loses a trick in each non-trump suit. Or he can play a spade losing to ace, and then opponents play a club to ace and another diamond, and he cashes one spade pitching one heart, but south can ruff the next spade...

Of course, this requires the right lead and careful defense, whereas beating 4♠ is pretty easy unless a heart is lead for some reason. But even on this hand where 4♠ bidder had a very surprising ♦Jx, both contracts are failing on best defense. If the 4♠ bidder had a more likely singleton diamond, then it's very probable that 4♠ will be best.

[dealmegold]

jdonn, on Feb 12 2010, 03:47 PM, said:

Pass?! Partner has something like KQJTxxx of spades and out. Even if he has the ace we still have two heart losers to worry about playing in diamonds, and he certainly won't have solid spades.

Why are we worried about heart losers if partner has all those spades?

I'm thinking "thanks partner, we just missed a slam". What a horrible bid!

[655321]

dealmegold, on Feb 14 2010, 06:55 AM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 12 2010, 03:47 PM, said:

Pass?! Partner has something like KQJTxxx of spades and out. Even if he has the ace we still have two heart losers to worry about playing in diamonds, and he certainly won't have solid spades.

Why are we worried about heart losers if partner has all those spades?

I'm thinking "thanks partner, we just missed a slam". What a horrible bid!

Um, which slam would that be?

[FrancesHinden]

I don't get all these complaints about partner's bidding without even seeing the hand.

4S showing a very long, internally solid spade suit with little outside that thinks 4S is the right place to play opposite the vast majority of opening bids. It takes up a lot of room, but that is OK because it is a very descriptive bid.

This hand is an obvious pass.

[dealmegold]

655321, on Feb 14 2010, 07:17 AM, said:

dealmegold, on Feb 14 2010, 06:55 AM, said:

I'm thinking "thanks partner, we just missed a slam". What a horrible bid!

Um, which slam would that be?

Not on these hands, but give me the club ace for the ten of diamonds...

So I guess partner's pre-empt here has to be pretty descriptive. No outside controls, six tricks?

[aguahombre]

Yes, it is always good to have very precise/descriptive meanings for bids that take up a lot of room after partner has opened.

[pooltuna]

FrancesHinden, on Feb 14 2010, 08:15 AM, said:

I don't get all these complaints about partner's bidding without even seeing the hand.

4S showing a very long, internally solid spade suit with little outside that thinks 4S is the right place to play opposite the vast majority of opening bids.  It takes up a lot of room, but that is OK because it is a very descriptive bid.

This hand is an obvious pass.

Does the following hand qualify?

---

If it does, pass is not obv, if it is too good then pass becomes clear.

[aguahombre]

Others, above, have indicated the spade suit should not be solid, Pool.

"Internally solid" (Frances), is a nice description for AQJXXXX or KQJXXXX(X), it seems.

[pooltuna]

aguahombre, on Feb 14 2010, 11:58 AM, said:

Others, above, have indicated the spade suit should not be solid, Pool.

"Internally solid" (Frances), is a nice description for AQJXXXX or KQJXXXX(X), it seems.

so let's get a firm definition of solid vs "internally solid." IMV that would be any holding that has no trump losers more than 50% of the time across the whole spectrum of partner's possible trump holding (assuming no ruffs). For example using this definition a trump holding of AKJ5432 ought to be good enough as with 4+ cards there are no losers, with 3 cards at least 75%, with 2 cards somewhere in the greater than 50% range, with 1 card need 32 break and finesse , and finally with a void you are in "deep doo doo".

[ArtK78]

To me, the 4♠ bid shows very long strong spades missing the ace and no first round controls (no aces and no voids). This would be limited to hands like

KQJxxxx xxx xx x

or

QJTxxxxx xx xx x

The suggested spade suit of AQJxxxx is too good. The presence of the ace means that opposite hands like the one presented in the OP a slam might be possible. For example, opposite AQJxxxx x xxx xx 6♦ would be a near claim.