[mcphee]

The old saying "don't play partner for specific cards" is one of those lessons that are hard to learn. I haven't learned it, and highly doubt he would take preference with stiff QD looking at 6H to the Q. So I vault to 3C foricing to game and do not pass until I get there.

Even the singleton 10 of D and the K of S lets me have a shot, or QJ of S with a S lead. A non forcing 3D just looks bad as I would never feel right if I heard 3N next. I have sympathy for the 2C bidders, but not me Ollie.

[Al_U_Card]

I guess it comes down to bidding to show more than you are supposed to have or as little as you should have. That's why 3C works best. It fills the bill for unbalanced, 2 suiter with "most values" (length is a value too) in the suits bid and 18+ hcp.

[Kalvan14]

pclayton, on Jan 10 2006, 06:59 AM, said:

Kalvan14, on Jan 9 2006, 09:07 PM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 9 2006, 10:52 PM, said:

Kalvan14, on Jan 9 2006, 06:06 PM, said:

2♠ is a nice bid over a 2♦ preference. 4♦ would also be forcing, IMHO.

Now the question is what the 3♣ers would rebid over 3♥

Easy; 4♦. Shows at least a 6-4 and is forcing.

Very good: pity, there is still no indication of a fit (or tolerance) for diamonds.
Now I give you three choices (really two, ):

• pard rebids 4H
  
  
• pard gives preference to 5C
  
  
• (unlikely) pard rebids 4NT

Are you still sure the hand is worth a GF without even the hint of a fit in diamonds?

If pard persists with 4♥ in the face of my massive 2 suiter, he must a fistful of them. Why? Over 3♣ - He could have given me preference (real or false) in diamonds, raised clubs, or punted with 3♠. And over 4♦ he could have gone back to clubs. I expect at least 6 real good ones, and probably 7, sometimes 8. So I pass 4♥

Over 5♣, I expect very short diamonds, so I will try 6♣ hoping he has a cover for my spade loser .

Fred's comment about making 5♦ across from any hand at the table is intriguing. I'm sure those that opt for 2♣ have a prepared excuse for their teammates why they missed 6♣ opposite: xxxx, Qxxx, A, 10xxx and were +170.

This hand is actually real good for a version of Cole I have in development, where 2♣ is forcing.

Different philosophies, I would say: this hand "xxxx, Qxxx, A, 10xxx" is not a pass; it is a courtesy raise to 3♣.

IMHO, even with this almost-perfect hand in front of me, mark me down for 5♣ rather than 6.

Pard would pass with xxxx Qxxxxx A xxx: I am fully ready to explain to my team mates why I stopped in a partial score, in such a case.

I would assume you have also an explanation for scoring -800 when partner holds Jxxx, AQxxxxx, -, xxx