[Sambolino]

Scoring: IMP

---

your RHO (dealer) opens 4H (you know his style, surely has a solid suit)
it's bd2 in a 14bd team match against fair opposition

[gwnn]

5♦, which will go for -800.

next board deal me the same and I'll still bid 5♦.

note: the only second thought I'd have would be a t/o X but that doesn't sound quite right.

[ochinko]

It depends on whether your partner's double would be for penalty or takeout.

Having too many spades I prefer to pass hoping partner would bid 4♠. To bid like that RHO will have from zero to two small spades. We may have 4♠ but not 5♦.

If partner doubles in the balancing position, I have an easy 5♦ bid.

Yes, we could easily miss a slam here, but there's not much left for science after opps open at game level.

[FrancesHinden]

It's too obscure not for me to bid my longest suit at the lowest level. 5D.

[mike777]

Pass, no problem yet.

[Gpm_bg]

I would bid Dbl, so if Partner has a penalty lenght in ♥, he will stay, if he has spades the dbl will ring that we have a fit.
If he don't like dbl or don't have spades you can pass correct any minor he bid on 5th level.
We might have 4♠ or also penalty if he have shape like 3=4=2=4 or sort of.
I won't miss the possibility 4♠ to be our final contract.
If I'm are too risky player, after 4♥-X-P-4♠-P-> i can bid 4nt as rebid. Nonvuln vs. Vuln it doesn't mean that we have to defense their contract. We might still have a time for slam contract, and 5♦ can confuse our way to the slam.

[P_Marlowe]

5D

Given your knowledge about the player
who opened 4H, this is even more clearer,
you know partner will have at most Q/J in
hearts, i.e. he will not have a lots of wastage,
if he has something at all.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[whereagles]

5♦ - no brainer ^^

[jdonn]

5♦, automatic. So what that it won't always work, neither will passing. What am I missing?

[pclayton]

5♦ but with a queasy feeling. Some bids we want to make; some bids we have to make.

We have a great suit and a void in the preemptor's suit. Whats not to like?

If they nail me; well, "preempts work".

[Halo]

I voted for 5♦ despite the fact that the first average hands I imagined for partner don't make.

I am interested in the argument for letting partner double or bid four spades, and maybe that is the winning approach, but I'll stick with bidding.

[foo]

Sambolino, on May 18 2007, 06:24 AM, said:

Dealer: East Vul: N/S Scoring: IMP

♠ 854 ♥   ♦ AQJ9875 ♣ KJ9

your RHO (dealer) opens 4H (you know his style, surely has a solid suit)
it's bd2 in a 14bd team match against fair opposition

I seem to recall old folk wisdom that one should never preempt a preempter...

While my D's are very nice, this is still a 11 HCP, 6 loser hand.
=AT UNFAVORABLE VULNERABILITY=

The only reason to bid here is if the odds favor us being in Game.
If there is any question as to whether We are saccing or not, bidding is suicidal.

GOP needs 4 cover cards for me to make 5D.
We may belong in 4S. For which he needs 3 good cards opposite my hand.
Worse, =I'm in front of GOP=. He may take me seriously and put me in 6.

Being aggressive about finding red games at IMPs does not mean one should make "Marie Antoinette" bids (those that put our head in the guillotine.).

There are too many minuses and too high a risk in bidding.
Pass.

[Fluffy]

count me for 5♦ also

[the hog]

Fluffy, on May 20 2007, 11:43 AM, said:

count me for 5♦ also

Me also. Mike, passing would be a problem.

[Sambolino]

tx for replies, the full deal was

Scoring: IMP

---

(4♥)-5♦-(dbl)-all pass
as the very first poster said it went for -800 after 3 rounds of spades and A of hearts ruffed; could've gone for -1100 if E played small club at trick four.

[han]

5D seems clear.

[mike777]

69% seems like a strong vote, but hardly clear I hope. 30%, even if only nonexpert votes, thought there was another option worthy of discussion.

[jdonn]

Frankly, this is the sort of disaster you have to have from time to time or else you are letting them push you around too easily. Even here the opponents were making game so it's a loss of imps but not a match ruining disaster. Sometimes partner has no tricks and no support, so be it.

[mike777]

jdonn, on May 20 2007, 02:46 PM, said:

Frankly, this is the sort of disaster you have to have from time to time or else you are letting them push you around too easily. Even here the opponents were making game so it's a loss of imps but not a match ruining disaster. Sometimes partner has no tricks and no support, so be it.

I think of this "pushing you around" phrase often at the table. I get confused if bidding is being pushed around or passing is being pushed around. I mean this as a serious discussion point here, not sarcasm.