[ajm218]

Scoring: IMP

4♦ 4♥ 5♦ ?

---

Scoring: IMP

4♦ 4♥ 5♦ ?

---

[whereagles]

1. 6♥. Worth a shot, I say.

2. Dbl.

[flytoox]

1. 6D, I hope pd can bid 7H.
2. 6D.

[jikl]

I agree with 6♥ and Dbl, another post slipped in.

Sean

[Halo]

6D seems this shows minor suit controls and hearts, so should help partner.

6D I don't have a definite trick, and my holding may mean there is no diamond trick in defence. Looks like -300, versus doubled vulnerable game making to me.

[inquiry]

6♥.. no logical way to investigate more.

Double. My partner bid 5♦ vul versus not. He had some expectations to take a fair number of tricks, and his diamonds are relativley ratty (AQJ at best), and I have these queens and jacks in the side suits. If I was on lead, I would lead a trump... hope partner has one and leads it....

[cherdano]

Halo, on Dec 22 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

6D seems this shows minor suit controls and hearts, so should help partner.

Why does it show minor suit controls?

[pclayton]

1. 6♥. Will you criticize pard for bidding a grand after a 6♦ call on: Axx, KQJxxx, void, AKxx? Frankly, I'm worried pard would even after my 6♥ call.

2. Pass. My trump and black quacks might be what pard needs for 6, but double sounds too encouraging.

[Codo]

1. If I could show this hand, I would. And 6 ♦ Will surely not show this hand. So it is always a guess and I believe that I am in a better position to guess then my pd. I will try 6 ♥, really beliving that we make all 13 tricks.

2. A thrid hand non vul 4 ♥ opening could be anything. Pd bid 5 ♦ to make in red and I have some usefull cards- not much more then he expected, but maybe the right ones. I will try 6 ♦

[Halo]

cherdano, on Dec 22 2006, 10:33 AM, said:

Halo, on Dec 22 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

6D  seems this shows minor suit controls and hearts, so should help partner.

Why does it show minor suit controls?

I think I need two controls outside trumps to cue bid. If one was spades I would bid 5S, so they must be clubs and diamonds. I don't see this as high risk because partner will devalue club honours if thinking of seven.

On the second I misread the bids for 5H vulnerable. I still think 6D is reasonable but not for the same reasons! One of the recent posts had several people bidding 5D over a 4M preempt with an enormous hand - where our sort of holding would easily make six. At least I understand the doublers now.

[mikeh]

1. 6♥. 6♦ is the sexy bid but, as has been observed, it invites partner to go wrong: there is a good chance he holds AK(x)(x) in a black suit, but why should it be in ♠s?


2. A confident 6♦, not because I expect it to be cold. It may be, but it may be down off the top. However, there will be a second way to win: the favourable opps may well take the push to 6♥: and that is a contract I am morally certain I can beat

[Halo]

mikeh, on Dec 22 2006, 12:44 PM, said:

1. 6♥. 6♦ is the sexy bid but, as has been observed, it invites partner to go wrong: there is a good chance he holds AK(x)(x) in a black suit, but why should it be in ♠s?

One thing is sure, you will not find out.

[cherdano]

Halo, on Dec 22 2006, 07:34 PM, said:

cherdano, on Dec 22 2006, 10:33 AM, said:

Halo, on Dec 22 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

6D  seems this shows minor suit controls and hearts, so should help partner.

Why does it show minor suit controls?

I think I need two controls outside trumps to cue bid. If one was spades I would bid 5S, so they must be clubs and diamonds. I don't see this as high risk because partner will devalue club honours if thinking of seven.

So if 5S is a cuebid, why isn't 6♣ a cuebid?

[the hog]

6H and Pass. Others have given the reasons.

[Halo]

cherdano, on Dec 22 2006, 10:27 PM, said:

So if 5S is a cuebid, why isn't 6♣ a cuebid?

I think it is quite normal in cue bidding sequences to cue the higher minor in order to focus attention on a major suit weakness.

It's fine if you disagree, but it seems a pity to have to give up on exploration with such a promising hand.

[dake50]

1. Can partner have SAKx with HKQxxx and not have doubled? I'm betting he has CAKx+ so I offer one+ C ruff DA and nada. Too rosy glassed for me. Double.

2. Double as least encouraging.

[tim_delane]

6H is quite enough. The ♦A opposite partner's likely void is of limited value.

Double. Just a guess.

Tim

[mr1303]

6H looks fine on the first. A guess, but these ones always are

The second hand looks like the classic hand not to bid at the 6 level. However, I doubt they're making much with my bits and pieces, so I'll give them an x card.

[neilkaz]

Hand 1) 6♥

Hand 2) I prefer X to 6♦ but can see where 6♦ may be better.