[straube]

KQxxx xxx QJTxx void

Think this was mps, not sure. V vs NV

1S P ?

We play Precision so I bid 4S here, alerted as wide-ranging (good LR to weak with spades)

Next hand bids 5C and partner doubles, passed back to me....

So 1S P 4S (5C) dbl P ?

Pass or pull this? Any rules of thumb here based on LTC? the double? the void? the vul?

[Cyberyeti]

What was your agreement about a 3♦ response ?

Partner might have already known what to do for certain if you'd been able to bid that, and your pass would be auto if he did X.

Pass can't be forcing, so this is a deliberate choice to X.

Has he got Axxxx, x, AKxx, QJx or does he have a club stack ? you don't know (but you would if you'd bid 3♦).

I think I pass but it's close.

[straube]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-February-23, 13:16, said:

What was your agreement about a 3♦ response ?

We play 3D is invitational diamonds...and we like that and needed it recently for some other hand.

Partner thought I should have bid 2N as LR+...after which I could have shown shortness. I like 4S better. If we were playing FSJs I'd have bid 4D just to prepare partner for the 5C bid.
Alternately we could use 3N and the 4-level to show voids, but I don't think this hand is that interested in slam unless partner has close to a perfecta.

[billw55]

This situation needs an understanding. Is partner making a firm decision, or a recommendation? If the latter, I pull, since I have zilch defense when I could have a fair amount ("wide ranging, could be good LR").

[nullve]

There could easily be as a few as 19 total trumps, but I expect the void alone to contribute one total trick. So I'd assume at least 20 total tricks and bid 5♠ accordingly.

[straube]

billw55, on 2016-February-23, 13:52, said:

This situation needs an understanding. Is partner making a firm decision, or a recommendation? If the latter, I pull, since I have zilch defense when I could have a fair amount ("wide ranging, could be good LR").

I agree about this. We were actually on different wavelengths here. Partner thought we were in a forcing pass situation as it looks like they are sacrificing against a freely made vulnerable game. OTOH, I could have Kxxxxx x xxx xxx for this bid so I don't see how it can be a forcing pass situation at all.

If a recommendation and we are in a forcing pass situation, then I think I agree I should pull.

What if our agreement is that we are not in a forcing pass situation? That was my understanding and the problem I thought I was facing.

[Cyberyeti]

straube, on 2016-February-23, 13:34, said:

We play 3D is invitational diamonds...and we like that and needed it recently for some other hand.

Partner thought I should have bid 2N as LR+...after which I could have shown shortness. I like 4S better. If we were playing FSJs I'd have bid 4D just to prepare partner for the 5C bid.
Alternately we could use 3N and the 4-level to show voids, but I don't think this hand is that interested in slam unless partner has close to a perfecta.

Clearly a FSJ at the 4 level is not worth bidding on this hand type, but I would use one at the 3 level. We had a strikingly similar example where I had a 2506 opposite 1♥ and after 1♥-P-3♣-(4♠)-P-P I was able to bid 5♦ to ensure that 5♠ would not be a profitable save.

[foobar]

Are there no takers for Jacoby 2N on this hand? Note that our 2N isn't limited to balanced hands with 4+ trump and can include distributional hands.

Maybe the best bid is some 4-level splinter, but assume that it isn't part of your bidding agreements.

Slam isn't out of the picture facing:

Axxxx AK Kxx xxx

More importantly, the 2N bid conveys the offensive nature of the hand much better than 4♠ (which could be based on lesser distribution and / or flatter shape).

Also, IMO having conveyed at least the "4-trump" message with LR+, it much easier to pass (5♣)-X.

[PhantomSac]

4S is 100 % imo. Being in a forcing pass is ridiculous. I would pass.

These kind of decisions have high volatility/can be somewhat random. That freaks people out, but the point of bidding 4S is to make them have to make a more random/hard decision. If they do choose to bid that can leave you having a more random decision but that doesn't mean your initial bid was wrong; your big upside is when they pass out 4S when they would have otherwise been able to bid.

[Phil]

PhantomSac, on 2016-February-23, 22:38, said:

4S is 100 % imo. Being in a forcing pass is ridiculous. I would pass.

These kind of decisions have high volatility/can be somewhat random. That freaks people out, but the point of bidding 4S is to make them have to make a more random/hard decision. If they do choose to bid that can leave you having a more random decision but that doesn't mean your initial bid was wrong; your big upside is when they pass out 4S when they would have otherwise been able to bid.

Sure but the volatility works both ways, right? As much as I like the wide ranging 4M call, even varying it a little not playing Precision, it's nice to be able to compete with 5/5 effectively or x when its right or is that something you just give up on?

My first reaction was 5S with the huge ODR but if x is just pure penalty then partners probably looking at short clubs himself and this hand just isn't that sexy.

[Zelandakh]

foobar, on 2016-February-23, 18:47, said:

Are there no takers for Jacoby 2N on this hand? Note that our 2N isn't limited to balanced hands with 4+ trump and can include distributional hands.

I think a LR+ 2NT is pretty ridiculous to be honest. The main alternative to 4♠ would be a splinter, particularly if you have a void splinter available, but 4♠ in Precision seems right to me.

[foobar]

Deleted...