[FrancesHinden]

I have no idea what the _right_ action is, but
4S = +450/480
5S = +980/-50
(6S also = +980 but personally I think that's an overbid)

partner has Axxxx clubs, some wasted high honours in the red suits and a singleton spade, you have to decide what to do in trumps in 6....

[hrothgar]

jdonn, on May 7 2008, 07:53 PM, said:

4♠ based on my general principles. Extremely close to 5 but the argument by others that partner can't evaluate accurately is compelling.

I don't despise Richard's plan for 4NT but I don't think it's likely to help. The correlation between partner's club length and club honors seems relatively slight to me, and it would do nothing toward slams that make based on a hand with partner like Qxx xxxx KQxxx x. But maybe it should at least rank higher than blasting 6♠?

In this case, partner's club preference did align with a missing club honor. The 4NT bid that I suggested would have led to a 6♠ contract, however, its far from clear if you want to be there.

I am trying to make up my mind about the merits of this approach. You no longer get to use 5♠ as cue bid in support of clubs in sequences like:

(4♥) - 4N - (P) - 5♣
(P) - 5♠

Grands are going to be much more difficult to bid. On the other hand, it might improve your ability to bid slams on hands like the one in question... We often talk about game before slam as a principle for prioritizing bidding space. I wonder if small before grands should be every bit as important a consideration.

One of the benefits of the method in question is auctions like the following

(4♥) - 4N - (P) - 5♣
(P) - 5♠

If we define this as a single suited hand with spades that is worried about Diamond controls partner can bid on with suitable hand.

Obviously, the main risk is auctions like

(4♥) - 4N - (P) - 5♣
(P) - 6♠

As Josh notes, its unclear how strong the correlation is between partner's club preference and club honors.

[helene_t]

Richard's idea is creative, playing with a partner that would accept my apology after he corrected my 6♠ to 7♦ I could easily be convinced that it is right.

Surprised by the number of experts who would bid 4. I was torn between 5 and 6.