[Fluffy]

Scoring: MP

N - E - S - W
1♣-1♠-X-3♠
4♣-ps-4♦-ps
5♦?-ps-??

---

X was systematic, no other forcing bid avaible but 2♠.
4♦ was... who knows , but looked for a ♥ cue.

[luke warm]

well i bid 5H, but can be convinced it isn't best

[adhoc3]

NFB, NFB, replace the Neg.X with 2♥, the process will be just fine.

I'll try 5♥ here. I cant count to 13 with pd's 6 cards ♣, yes, probably solid 7, but cant be sure. If he do not cuebid 5♠, I'll jump to 7NT. If pd bid 5♠...... K? singleton? Another headache.

[P_Marlowe]

6C, go easy.

You have a fit, 4C has to be a 6 card,
and unless the opponents are complete
lunatic, after all they are red verus white,
7 will be no lock.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Blofeld]

If I bid 7NT with confidence they might save.

[whereagles]

6♣. I give up on 7.

[Trpltrbl]

4♦ not so good, just bid 4♠ or even 4 NT.
You want to know what pd has in ♣ and if he has good values in ♥.

GBB

[FrancesHinden]

What did 4D mean?
Could you have had a forcing diamond bid in your negative double?
If so, it looks as if that's what partner thinks you have shown.

[Al_U_Card]

4D (unless you have that agreement about it showing longer H than D....) was a pretty poorly designed attempt to show your hand but at this point I like 5NT which says pick a slam.....just bidding H at your first opportunity then D seems better, especially at MP scoring where the C slam will not score as well as the H slam..

[awm]

I'll bid 7NT, just to end the madness.

Negative free bids certainly take some of the blame for the fix on this board.

I think the interesting call is partner's free 4♣ bid. This must show some sort of extras, but given the hand we were dealt it's hard to believe partner has more than a minimum opener (in fact partner is a favorite to hold something like 10-11 points since the opponents won't stop bidding). So I'll place partner with a bunch of good clubs. Since these clubs are running, we could easily have 13 (or 14, or 15, or 16) tricks in notrump. Perhaps partner holds something like:

x
Qx
Qx
KQJxxxxx

Tough to open a preempt with both outside queens and such a suit (3NT could easily be cold, 3♣/4♣ surely show a much worse hand at these colors, 5♣ is a huge position with defensive values in the reds). This leaves plenty of space for RHO to have a reasonable overcall (say a ten count with five spades and a little shape), and for LHO to have a lousy hand in points but five-card support and singleton club.

It seems like at worst 7NT will be on a heart finesse through overcaller, which is surely more than 50-50 to make (I'm placing LHO with virtually nothing but five trumps on the bidding).

[mikeh]

I began to comment that I loved seeing NFB problems because they are almost always about losing lots of imps NFB's may work on partscore hands but they generally show very badly on slammish hands.

But, hate NFB's as I do, I actually think this may be a triumph for the method.

Imagine bidding 2♥ and having partner bid 4♥. We could blackwood, but we could never count 13 tricks, because we wouldn't know of the ♣ source.

Of course, we'd reblack and partner could bid grand if his ♣ were solid anyway

Okay, this is not a triumph for NFB after all (I am relieved).

I bid 7N

Surely partner has a good ♣ suit: after all he has no aces.

Give him an incredibly bad hand: Qx Qx Jxx KQJ10xx (and surely to g*d he has better than that, and 7N makes on a squeeze and finesse: cash the top ♠ and ♦ and run the ♣: finishing rho if he began with Kxxxx Kxxx Qxx x

Of course, I join in the criticism of 4♦: I guess you were afraid that 4♥ would be passed. The NFB has caused you to be literally unable to bid your best and longest suit: what a wonderful method

Hoping for a 4♥ cue was silly. He would need the A to cue, since he has a miserable hand in hcp, and you are looking at that card. Plus, if he did cue, so what? Is he ever going to think that his cue bid set trump?

4♠ was the answer, even though it will surely fetch 5♣. You would then be in the same position as now. But you could then bid a masterful 5N: showing all 4 aces and some extras and some grand slam interest: a good partner would not be confused by this sequence: it cannot be a choice of slams, since no other strain was ever suggested. It cannot be GSF, since you learned nothing over 4♠ and could have used GSF last time. It might be a void in ♠ and asking for solid ♣, but his red suit holdings will likely tell him that your reds cannot be that strong... I admit I am uncomfortable with this last point.

[Fluffy]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 17 2005, 06:24 PM, said:

What did 4D mean?
Could you have had a forcing diamond bid in your negative double?
If so, it looks as if that's what partner thinks you have shown.

Yes you can have a forcing hand with ♦

[Fluffy]

Those who didn't like 4♦ what would they bid?

4♠ is transfer to 5♣, partner has no aces!

[jdeegan]

I had to vote for 4♦ was not the best bid. BECAUSE, what you care about most is whether the clubs are running. If they are, you should have 13 tricks (or more). So, bid 5NT. You may pay off to four clubs to the jack somewhere, but you should chance it.

Solid clubs will give you 6 or 7 tricks. Your aces and kings provide four more, so partner's opening bid needs to supply only a modicum of fitting cards, e.g. ♥KQ, ♦QJ, ♠ K, ♥K and ♦Q. They should be there, and no amount of bidding is going to identify all your needs, so pick the biggie (running clubs) and trust to the bridge gods for the rest.

After hearing 7♣, you might want to hazard 7NT just in case the clubs don't run, but something else does.

[Fluffy]

Actually I had no doubt at all that clubs were running, althou I was almost wrong, here is the full deal:

---

I made some extra cuebids in hope of finding partner bidding his ♥K, without any success, so I just closed the bidding on what I though was a practical 7♣, as it turned out it is not only the worst grand you can play and the one who score the lowest, it took partner a headache and long thinking to refuse taking the ♣ finese with this bidding. But he did .