[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass
 Pass  1♥    2NT!  3♣!
 5♦    5♥    Pass  Pass
 Pass  

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

Simple answer yes you can reach 6, but it is not easy
and it may quite often lead to 6H-1.
And you need agreements, which one should not bother
to make, if one is still B/I, even adv. players wont need
them

Given how the auction developed, you may reach 6, if
3C does create a forcing pass.
Since the 3C bid showed a inv.+ in hearts, some play
that such a raise creates a FP, at least in case the auction
reaches the 5 level.

If this would be case, opener can pass and pull the double
to show a slam invitation.
If responder may or may not accept, most likely he should,
given his 2 key cards.

But I would not bother to make such an agreement, unless
I play often enough, and regular against good opposition.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If the auction developed as described, one should give
up on reaching 7, it is hard to reach 7 with the confidience
that the contract has at least a 68-75% chance to succed.

[finally17]

P_Marlowe, on Feb 23 2008, 06:19 PM, said:

Hi,

Simple answer yes you can reach 6, but it is not easy
and it may quite often lead to 6H-1.

How exactly do these particular hands "quite often" go -1? Certainly there being a spade void and the opps actually getting the ruff isn't enough to be called "quite often" since the opening leader would be the voided one. And I don't see another remotely possible path. I guess your definition is broader than mine, but it's certainly worth bidding.

[Cascade]

finally17, on Feb 24 2008, 12:52 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Feb 23 2008, 06:19 PM, said:

Hi,

Simple answer yes you can reach 6, but it is not easy
and it may quite often lead to 6H-1.

How exactly do these particular hands "quite often" go -1? Certainly there being a spade void and the opps actually getting the ruff isn't enough to be called "quite often" since the opening leader would be the voided one. And I don't see another remotely possible path. I guess your definition is broader than mine, but it's certainly worth bidding.

I don't think he means these two hands together.

When you bid six you don't normally get to see your partner's hand in advance. Here for example if north bids six over 5♣ he will not know for certain that partner has two key-cards. And even if he does there is a possible third round spade or second round club loser.

In my opinion north is super good for 5♥ but it is not clear what alternative you have. You need partner to cover three of your four losers. That is possible but you have to judge whether it is likely from a passed hand.

If you played a forcing pass here then you might be able to make a slam try by passing and then pulling partner's double. But I don't see how the 3♣ cue can create a forcing pass as opener may well have opened light in third seat.

I think the choice is between a conservative 5♥ and an optimistic 6♥ having been wrong a couple of times lately by being conservative I am starting to think you need to be more optimistic in these situations. So 6♥ for me over 5♦.

[Cascade]

I am assuming 3♣ unconditionally showed heart support. That may not be standard but happens to be exactly how I play it here.

Our rule is the lowest cue always shows support for partner. There may be a better rule but it is more important to have a rule.

[cherdano]

Tough one. I think North is just about good enough to gamble 6♥. It is a good contract opposite ♠A + ♣K. Of course it can be a disaster if partner has diamond wastage.

The pass over 5♦ is clearly not forcing IMO.

[finally17]

cherdano, on Feb 23 2008, 07:59 PM, said:

Tough one. I think North is just about good enough to gamble 6♥. It is a good contract opposite ♠A + ♣K. Of course it can be a disaster if partner has diamond wastage.

The pass over 5♦ is clearly not forcing IMO.

I would hope partner is very max for "a good heart raise" if he's got lots of minor suit cards. If you can trust him to have his bid, even with some wasted ♦ values I'd think it's a good gamble.

Where do y'all draw the line between 3♣ and 3♥? Strictly a game invitational hand or what?

[rogerclee]

I prefer to play pass by N to be forcing over 5♦ to deal with problems like this. That said, I think this is nonstandard, if not wildly nonstandard.

I think N decided not to gamble and was wrong this time, but that decision is far from clear. It is close for me; I would probably bid 6♥.

[cherdano]

rogerclee, on Feb 23 2008, 07:56 PM, said:

I prefer to play pass by N to be forcing over 5♦ to deal with problems like this. That said, I think this is nonstandard, if not wildly nonstandard.

I think N decided not to gamble and was wrong this time, but that decision is far from clear. It is close for me; I would probably bid 6♥.

I think forcing pass helps very little when responder's hand is so well-defined (maximum passed hand). Here, for example, responder would obviously sign off if opener made a forcing pass.

[han]

I think north should bite the bullet and bid 6H (assuming that 3C showed an invitational or better heart raise).

Good problem, I would have preferred to see only the north hand over 5D.

[P_Marlowe]

finally17, on Feb 23 2008, 06:52 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Feb 23 2008, 06:19 PM, said:

Hi,

Simple answer yes you can reach 6, but it is not easy
and it may quite often lead to 6H-1.

How exactly do these particular hands "quite often" go -1? Certainly there being a spade void and the opps actually getting the ruff isn't enough to be called "quite often" since the opening leader would be the voided one. And I don't see another remotely possible path. I guess your definition is broader than mine, but it's certainly worth bidding.

Cascade already answered your question, but I would stress
another point, which is important to me:

Assume for a moment, you encountered a pair of hands, which
caused a problem, which you did not bid solve 100% successfully.

You can either try to focuse on this particular pair or you can try
to look for a general theme.
And if you want to win consistenly you should do the later.

And if you are looking for a general theme, you can do two things
1) ask, if the whole thing was "just" a judgement thing, and if it was,
work on improving your judgement, this work is the most rewarding
bidding area, one can work on
2) ask, if there are some (general) conventional tools available,
which may have helped in the given situation, ... keeping in
mind that judgement will still be needed, although the additional
conventional tools may provide you with more (helpfull) information on
which to base your decision.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

cherdano, on Feb 23 2008, 09:08 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Feb 23 2008, 07:56 PM, said:

I prefer to play pass by N to be forcing over 5♦ to deal with problems like this. That said, I think this is nonstandard, if not wildly nonstandard.

I think N decided not to gamble and was wrong this time, but that decision is far from clear. It is close for me; I would probably bid 6♥.

I think forcing pass helps very little when responder's hand is so well-defined (maximum passed hand). Here, for example, responder would obviously sign off if opener made a forcing pass.

A forcing pass can still be helpful, afterall you also
need to decide, if you go for your own contract or
go for blood.
And responders hand, as well defined as the hand
may be, may vary with regard to the usefulnes for
defending.
The option to make a quatitative slam move, is just
a bonus.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jillybean]

Needless to say I didnt have any agreements at this level with my pard. He would have liked me to bid my ♠, I think showing ♥ support is my first priority.

I like Uns. vs Uns. showing a forcing raise in either major. If one is better use to show direct support I dont know, I've only played this with Richard and we used 3♦ as gf support in pards major, 3♣ gf in other major.

Marlowe Im not losing any sleep or spending much time studying these hands, lord knows I have other important areas to work on. I just find it an interesting, fun and short diversion

[Cascade]

If you ever open light in third seat then playing a forcing pass here is completely impractical.

[gwnn]

North really has to bid 6♥. It's not obvious, but once you think about it, it's a fun bid that rates to turn out nicely. If you accuse me of seeing both hands, you are probably right.