[Free]

You hold:

Scoring: MP

---

RHO opens 4♥ in 1st seat. What's your plan?

THIS IS MATCHPOINTS!!!

[han]

5D, maybe I'll buy it here.

[dake50]

4N. If 1xA, 5D. If 2-3A, 6D.

[Free]

dake50, on Apr 12 2008, 04:30 PM, said:

4N. If 1xA, 5D. If 2-3A, 6D.

I don't think 4NT is Blacky...

[Apollo81]

5♦. It may be matchpoints, but it is still bridge.

[FrancesHinden]

Apollo81, on Apr 12 2008, 04:38 PM, said:

5♦. It may be matchpoints, but it is still bridge.

me too

Do you get more matchpoints for making 5D or going off in 4S?

[jdonn]

4♠, running if doubled (of course). If you aren't doubled then how can this not be right at matchpoints?

Apollo81, on Apr 12 2008, 10:38 AM, said:

5♦.  It may be matchpoints, but it is still bridge.

I disagree that matchpoints is bridge.

dake50, on Apr 12 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

4N. If 1xA, 5D. If 2-3A, 6D.

LOL I needed this post to wake me up in the morning, ty.

[awm]

I'd bid 4NT followed by 5♦ over partner's likely 5♣. This is "two places to play" for me, not blackwood.

Admittedly there might be times when we need to play exactly 4♠, or when partner has something like xxx/x in our suits and we play in the "wrong" fit. But this at least gives us the chance to get to spades when we have a big fit there without unilaterally deciding we are playing in spades (I suspect there will be a lot of times when 5♦ is better than 4♠ and LHO doesn't double, or when 4♠ is higher-scoring than 5♦ and LHO does double). Showing the two-suiter also gives us a chance at slam -- say partner holds KQxx xxx Ax xxxx, I think he can bid slam over 4NT...5♦ but will he bid slam over a direct 5♦? And if he would, wouldn't he also with xxxx xxx Ax KQxx (oops)?

[gnasher]

awm, on Apr 12 2008, 06:04 PM, said:

Showing the two-suiter also gives us a chance at slam -- say partner holds KQxx xxx Ax xxxx, I think he can bid slam over 4NT...5♦ but will he bid slam over a direct 5♦? And if he would, wouldn't he also with xxxx xxx Ax KQxx (oops)?

With xxxx xxx Ax KQxx, won't he bid 6♣ over your 4NT, which is usually the minors?

[cherdano]

For me, 4N would be minors, in fact.

[pclayton]

cherdano, on Apr 12 2008, 10:29 AM, said:

For me, 4N would be minors, in fact.

Same here. Why would you sacrifice a level of bidding just to show two suits?

4♠ for me. LHO will either be itching to double this or not.

[gnasher]

I don't mind the idea that bidding 4NT (ostensibly minors) followed by converting clubs to diamonds should mean something. However, partner has to be able to bid on the assumption that you have both minors, so you should be prepared to hear a jump to 6♣.

I think that the sequence should show a slam try with just diamonds - if he bids 6♣ over that, you'll probably be happy enough to play in 6♦. This hand wouldn't qualify, because slam requires specifically a spade fit rather than just general values.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2008-April-12, 12:43

[TimG]

Shouldn't any plan involve what to do after we take action and 3rd hand raises to 5♥?

[jdonn]

awm, on Apr 12 2008, 12:04 PM, said:

I'd bid 4NT followed by 5♦ over partner's likely 5♣. This is "two places to play" for me, not blackwood.

There was a hand you played against me the other day where I thought you would have seen showing two suits at once with a two card discrepancy is very risky. What if partner has xx and x?

[helene_t]

Yes, 5♦ and 5♠ over LHO's 5♥.

What if p doubles 5♥? Is this 100% penanlty or am I supposed to run with a hand like this one?

[gnasher]

helene_t, on Apr 12 2008, 08:59 PM, said:

Yes, 5♦ and 5♠ over LHO's 5♥.

What if p doubles 5♥? Is this 100% penanlty or am I supposed to run with a hand like this one?

I think that the main message of such doubles should be not "I think this is going off", but "I think we were making". If we weren't making our game, I'm less concerned about extracting a penalty.

So, I'd bid 5♠ even if he doubles 5♥.

[TimG]

gnasher, on Apr 12 2008, 03:47 PM, said:

helene_t, on Apr 12 2008, 08:59 PM, said:

Yes, 5♦ and 5♠ over LHO's 5♥.

What if p doubles 5♥? Is this 100% penanlty or am I supposed to run with a hand like this one?

I think that the main message of such doubles should be not "I think this is going off", but "I think we were making". If we weren't making our game, I'm less concerned about extracting a penalty.

So, I'd bid 5♠ even if he doubles 5♥.

Yeah, I think this is better than 4NT. I'm not really confident about 5♠ over 5♥ (doubled or not), but I'm much happier than I would be after ...4N-5♥-DBL/P-P to me.

[Halo]

5D

4S is interesting, but maybe oppo is just itching to pass and take it down.

[rogerclee]

4♠ all the way.

[awm]

Certainly I agree that there is some risk inherent in showing a two-suiter when you have a two-card discrepancy between the suits.

But surely this is better than just unilaterally bidding your shorter suit?