[cherdano]

mikeh, on Aug 23 2007, 10:44 AM, said:

Finally, at the risk of boring everyone, this hand does remind me of a hand I held in a Regional Pairs many years ago: white v red, partner opened 3♠, RHO bid 4♠ and my 6♥ ended the auction, albeit after some slow passes. 6♥ was down 12: Qxxx xx Qxxxx xx. RHO was afraid grand would fail and 6♠ doubled would be less than 6♥ undoubled.

So I was surprised to see no votes so far for 6 red

Wow, now THAT is an example of pessimistic thinking (by your RHO)

[FrancesHinden]

6 red is cute. I'd have voted for it if I had thought of it, although not against very good opponents.

[Fluffy]

I can't hardly imagine partner having any single card outside spades. I don't like to bury slams first position at least.

[jtfanclub]

Fluffy, on Aug 23 2007, 01:19 PM, said:

I can't hardly imagine partner having any single card outside spades. I don't like to bury slams first position at least.

Your partner only has a 7 card suit. That's a heck of a bid with nothing outside.

[cherdano]

jtfanclub, on Aug 23 2007, 01:09 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Aug 23 2007, 01:19 PM, said:

I can't hardly imagine partner having any single card outside spades. I don't like to bury slams first position at least.

Your partner only has a 7 card suit. That's a heck of a bid with nothing outside.

AKQxxxx x xx xxx is a normal 4S bid white vs red 1st position for most. I don't know anyone who would open 4S with that spade suit and a side ace or king, and it is certainly impossible in a preempting style close to standard.

[bid_em_up]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 23 2007, 10:29 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 04:19 PM, said:

Is there some reason to believe that partner cannot have Jx of clubs and a side card?

If you are prepared to defend at the 6-level, you can bid clubs now if you like.

If you are planning to save over 6 red suit, I see no point in bidding clubs.

And what would you prefer if you end up defending 7 of a red suit? (Or do you intend to save?)

[bid_em_up]

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 04:19 PM, said:

Is there some reason to believe that partner cannot have Jx of clubs and a side card?

Why can't I defend at the five-level? If the club Ace is to my right, and partner has some extra defense, I'm OK with defending at the five-level.

Give partner something juicy, and he might just double them at the five-level.

Hmmm. What kind of hand do you think a 1st seat 4S not vul vs. vul opening bid should be?

We already know he has AKQxxxx of spades. Any side card (A/K) should be a clear 1S opener, not 4S. So I think you are expecting too much.

[bid_em_up]

mikeh, on Aug 23 2007, 11:44 AM, said:

Finally, at the risk of boring everyone, this hand does remind me of a hand I held in a Regional Pairs many years ago: white v red, partner opened 3♠, RHO bid 4♠ and my 6♥ ended the auction, albeit after some slow passes. 6♥ was down 12: Qxxx xx Qxxxx xx. RHO was afraid grand would fail and 6♠ doubled would be less than 6♥ undoubled.

So I was surprised to see no votes so far for 6 red

4N blackwood, 5 red, 5 clubs, 6C, 6 red, all will work.

The opponents cannot profitably double you without allowing you to run to 5S (or 6).

I'm not sure if 4N blackwood is allowable or not. Some folks seem to believe that it is a psychic of a conventional bid. Others think its just a tactical bid to confuse the opponents.

Any opinions?

[skjaeran]

bid_em_up, on Aug 23 2007, 09:35 PM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 23 2007, 11:44 AM, said:

Finally, at the risk of boring everyone, this hand does remind me of a hand I held in a Regional Pairs many years ago: white v red, partner opened 3♠, RHO bid 4♠ and my 6♥ ended the auction, albeit after some slow passes. 6♥ was down 12: Qxxx xx Qxxxx xx. RHO was afraid grand would fail and 6♠ doubled would be less than 6♥ undoubled.

So I was surprised to see no votes so far for 6 red

4N blackwood, 5 red, 5 clubs, 6C, 6 red, all will work.

The opponents cannot profitably double you without allowing you to run to 5S (or 6).

I'm not sure if 4N blackwood is allowable or not. Some folks seem to believe that it is a psychic of a conventional bid. Others think its just a tactical bid to confuse the opponents.

Any opinions?

And you're not allowed to psyche a conventional bid? Where on earth are you playing? Oops, don't tell me - it might be the ACBL?

[jdonn]

bid_em_up, on Aug 23 2007, 02:35 PM, said:

mikeh, on Aug 23 2007, 11:44 AM, said:

Finally, at the risk of boring everyone, this hand does remind me of a hand I held in a Regional Pairs many years ago: white v red, partner opened 3♠, RHO bid 4♠ and my 6♥ ended the auction, albeit after some slow passes. 6♥ was down 12: Qxxx xx Qxxxx xx. RHO was afraid grand would fail and 6♠ doubled would be less than 6♥ undoubled.

So I was surprised to see no votes so far for 6 red

4N blackwood, 5 red, 5 clubs, 6C, 6 red, all will work.

The opponents cannot profitably double you without allowing you to run to 5S (or 6).

I'm not sure if 4N blackwood is allowable or not. Some folks seem to believe that it is a psychic of a conventional bid. Others think its just a tactical bid to confuse the opponents.

Any opinions?

How can you possibly psych a bid that only asks for something but doesn't show anything in particular? Anything the opponents think blackwood shows is an inference from the auction, not an agreement.

[kenrexford]

bid_em_up, on Aug 23 2007, 02:31 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 04:19 PM, said:

Is there some reason to believe that partner cannot have Jx of clubs and a side card?

Why can't I defend at the five-level? If the club Ace is to my right, and partner has some extra defense, I'm OK with defending at the five-level.

Give partner something juicy, and he might just double them at the five-level.

Hmmm. What kind of hand do you think a 1st seat 4S not vul vs. vul opening bid should be?

We already know he has AKQxxxx of spades. Any side card (A/K) should be a clear 1S opener, not 4S. So I think you are expecting too much.

It appears that partner has AKQxxxx in spades. However, white-on-red partner might even have a six-card spade suit, IMO, especially with a side 4-card suit. Would you not open 4♠, at these colors, with AKQxxx-x-xx-xxxx? Maybe you would not. I might. Or, AKQxxx-x-x-xxxxx?

I suppose the idea of defending at the five-level is a tad silly, but certainly a higher contract might be defendable.

[bid_em_up]

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 04:10 PM, said:

It appears that partner has AKQxxxx in spades.  However, white-on-red partner might even have a six-card spade suit, IMO, especially with a side 4-card suit.  Would you not open 4♠, at these colors, with AKQxxx-x-xx-xxxx?  Maybe you would not.  I might.  Or, AKQxxx-x-x-xxxxx?

I suppose the idea of defending at the five-level is a tad silly, but certainly a higher contract might be defendable.

Ken, the point is you state partner can have a side card. I dont think this is very likely, and neither of your examples prove me wrong. Neither of them contain a side card.

Would you really open 4S on AQxxxx x xx Axxx? Or AQxxxx x Kxxx xx? KQxxxx x xx Axxx?

If you would, more power to you, but I do not think the majority of players would. Not when they have other perfectly "normal" bids available to them that describe these hands.

[FrancesHinden]

bid_em_up, on Aug 23 2007, 08:26 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Aug 23 2007, 10:29 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Aug 23 2007, 04:19 PM, said:

Is there some reason to believe that partner cannot have Jx of clubs and a side card?

If you are prepared to defend at the 6-level, you can bid clubs now if you like.

If you are planning to save over 6 red suit, I see no point in bidding clubs.

And what would you prefer if you end up defending the 7 of a red suit? (Or do you intend to save?)

If I end up defending 7 red suit I would prefer not to have bid clubs, unless I have passed throughout.

If I raise 4S to 6S partner won't lead a spade against 7 red, he will know the risk.

[zman102]

Thank you all for responding to my post. I appreciate your thoughtful answers.

I actually bid 6 spades at the table. I don't really think that was right. Maybe makes me a pesismist (how to spell?). I assumed my opps would make the optimal bid. Not the best analysis at an acbl game. I now think pass would have been the best bid (not maybe the "right" bid, but best).

What I was thinking at the time was I would not pass over a 5 level red bid, so instead of giving fielders choice over my 5 spade bid (which I would have made), I should bid to my max level right away (would I have passed a six level red bid?).

So then I thought maybe a six level club bid would have been best, to keep the sluff and ruff from happening......down less than their game undoubled (if doubled I run to six spades). So I think if I am going to bid 6 spades I should bid 6 clubs first.

So I made two mistakes.....not passing and not bidding 6 clubs if I am going to bid 6 spades.

So now I second guess again (lol). Maybe 5 clubs is better so we might set a red slam.....breaks up an end play....then I can bid 5 spades over their red suit 5 level. And hope to beat their 6 level contract.

But thank you again for responding. I am still not 100% sure as to the right bid. But I wish I had passed.

[Fluffy]

Hey come on, tell us the full deal!

[zman102]

Hi Fluffy.

This hand was FUBAR from the git-go. Not too much to be gained by looking at all the mistakes in the hand. Mind melts by all.

I don't mind showing my mistakes, but I think I'll not show everyone elses.

Thank you for your interest.

[whereagles]

I think I'm going tactical here. Pass, followed by some nr. of spades if opps bid a slam.