[Fluffy]

Scoring: IMP

S - N
4♠-5♣*
6♠-7♠

---

5♣ = cue in ♣, ♠ agreed as fit

[han]

I see no reason to divide only 100%, because both north and south need more than 50%.

The ugliest bid imo was 6S, clearly 5D is much better and it would keep you out of the grand for sure.

The worst bid was probably 7S, as this is a complete guess.

[hrothgar]

Fluffy, on Mar 27 2006, 08:01 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

S - N
4♠-5♣
6♠-7♠

---

Hard to tell without some idea about what methods are being used...

Case in point: If you are playing relatively disciplined 4 level preempts of the sort described in "Preempts from A to Z", the Spade suit isn't strong enough for a 4 level preempt at this vulnerability.

Equally significant, I have no idea what the 5♣ meant. This is (often) played as some kind of Control Asking Bid.

I place most of the blame on North because 7♠ seems unilateral. Even if South had the Ace of Spades rather than the Ace of Diamonds, 7♠ looks to be a crap shot. Would you want to play 7♠ opposite

♠ AQJxxxxx
♥
♦ xxx
♣ xx

[inquiry]

North gets almost all the blame. Why?

North does see his diamond void right? I see it. His partner bid slam so must have a control in diamonds and in hearts. The one in hearts is likely to be a singelton or void, but do we think south can be void in diamonds? I think not. So south has a sure diamond stopper (ACE or possibly king). What ever it is, it is wasted opposite our void. So if partner has a high diamond honor, what does his spades look like. Can he have"

♠AQxxxxx ♥x ♦Axx ♣xx or ♠AQxxxxx ♥x ♦Kxx ♣xx. Not the way I preempt. The diamond honor partner has is a clear warning to stop.

If north FELT in the gambling mood, he could have bid 5NT over 4♠,, this way, he is gambling that the hearts come home (hook or ruffing setup) and gets to grand if partner holds (as expected) AQ long in spades.

I think south's bidding is adequately justified.

[whereagles]

It was going so well up to 5♣. After that whole hell broke loose; both players taking unwarranted flights of fancy

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

this is easy .-), South.

North asks South to cooperate, but South
refuses and shoots the slam blindly.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Even if 5C agrees spade, North may be
looking for another strain, it may be impossible
for North to bid a suit naturally, South should
simply finish the description of his hand.

[jdonn]

North should not have been guessing at a grand but it's easy to see why he thought it was making. I HATE when partners do to me what south did, by which I mean randomly jumping around and forcing me to guess what to bid when it would have been so easy to investigate. 5♦ over 5♣ then 5NT by north seems an easy way to stay out. I give south 75%, if he wants to force his partner to guess then he can't be mad when partner guesses wrong. I want to give south 100%, but clearly 7♠ is a wild shot in the dark so north has to eat some blame as well.

[FrancesHinden]

This looks like a joint effort to me as well.

4S opening: not ideal for a game all pre-empt, but you do have 8 of the wretched things, hard to crime it too much. Best bid of the auction.

5C: what was this trying to achieve? You have first round control in all the side suits. You have at least a 10-card spade fit. What can partner do over 5C that is going to help you? He's not going to cue-bid the king of hearts, that's for sure. Just bid what the hand is worth: 6S. Pay out to AQJxxxx Kx xxx x. (If you play the common method where a new suit asks for a control in the next suit up you are still in trouble, because you can't tell the difference between the HK and a heart singleton.)

6S: Seems a bit wild. What's wrong with 5D? I'm not sure why this hand is suddenly worth accepting a slam try, as it doesn't seem to have anything extra for a 4S opening.

7S: I have more sympathy for this, but seems to be taking an unnecessary risk.

[jdeegan]

North 100%

I don't see any justification for blaming South at all. True, he could have bid 5♦ and North would have known that seven would require a two ace preempt, but 6♠, whatever you might think of it, did not create the disaster. Over 6♠, North should shrug his shoulders and "stay fixed".

North could have bid 5NT every time it was his turn, and he STILL hasn't done so. North can almost count 13 tricks opposite AK eighth: eight spades, three diamond ruffs and two aces w/o a spade lead OR eight spades, two aces, two diamond ruffs and a long heart or a club hook with a spade lead.

A totally egregious bidding error that results in a bad contract, in my view, has to take a 100% charge. Bidding is too difficult to assess charges against South for being less than perfect.

[joshs]

The buck stops here. Its my fault.

[hatchett]

I dislike 6♠, 5♦ seems obvious. 7♠ is wild.

[Kalvan14]

75% S (6♠ is unwarranted and unnecessary), 75% N (his bid was 6♠; messed around with 5♣, and finally took a wild gambling over 6♠).

[HeartA]

North could have bid 5N. So I assigned most to North.

[awm]

I blame Josh Sher. Which hand did he hold? Neither? Even better.

Okay, actually I'll go with south for most of the blame. Usually the person who makes the first misleading call shoulders most of the blame. I think 4♠ should usually show a better suit, and jumping to slam should confirm a better suit. North was forced to guess, and guessed badly, but he shouldn't have been forced to guess to begin with.

[Codo]

I would blame both, because they did not play controll asking bids.
I would blame north for 7 ♠ and for his missing "bidding plan". How will 5 Club help him? He should blast 6 Spade or bid Josephine.

I would blame South for 6 ♠, 5 Diamond would describe the hand much better.

So after all, both got what they deserved....

[hotShot]

And the blame goes to .... south.

Opening 4♠ is ok, but with 9 HCP in his hand and a weak 8 carder in ♠ it is not neccessary to preempt that high. Opps might not have game and with the *boss* suit he can allways overbid them on the same level later. Opening 1♠ or 3♠ would have been a better idea.

After partners 5♣ (first round control ♣) south has still 5 looser left in his hand. Of cause north will have more than this, but bidding 6♠ is incooperative. South guesses that north will cover 5 of his 6 looser, and he inhibits any scientific bidding from north.

Those who dislike 5♣, what bid is better? What makes you think that south would pass 6♠ with an unpromissed ace in his hand ?

North 7♠ is a brilliant bid, after showing ♣A, south jumps to 6♠. Assuming that south will only bid 6 if there is at least a 50% chance to make it. North knows that additionaly to the ♣ control he showed, he is covering all ♦ loosers, 1-2 heart looser and a ♠ looser. If unfortunatelly the problem is in ♣ there is still a 50% that a finesse will bring another trick. With a little luck the ♥ can be made to a source of tricks. So if south had what was promissed by 6♠, 7♠ would have at least a 50% chance.

South 4♠ is a little weak, but ok. Bidding 6♠ promisses strength at the upper limit of possible 4♠ openings. So south is to blame.

[whereagles]

I can't believe people are haggling about the 4♠ bid. It's an absolutely standard textbook example of a 4♠ opening bid!

Sure, you can try 3♠ as well, but that's pretty wimpy.

[hatchett]

I agree 4♠ looks pretty straight down the middle to me

[Fluffy]

Codo, on Mar 28 2006, 07:15 AM, said:

I would blame both, because they did not play controll asking bids.

mmm if the bidding starts:

4♠-5♥*
6♠-.....

5♥ asks for control

You are already in 7.

[FrancesHinden]

hotShot, on Mar 28 2006, 11:09 AM, said:

Those who dislike 5♣, what bid is better? What makes you think that south would pass 6♠ with an unpromissed ace in his hand ?

If I open 4S and partner raises to 6 I am not expected to bid again under any circumstances whatsoever. Certainly not on this hand where you have about the number of aces partner was entitled to expect, but is isn't even in the suit partner is hoping for. The diamond void opposite can hardly be a surprise when partner raises 4S to 6S.

OK, perhaps if I'd opened 4S on

AKQJxxxxxxxxx
-
-
-

for a laugh I might be allowed to raise. But that's basically it.