[pclayton]

All Vul, Imps

Me....LHO...pard...RHO
----- ---- Pass....1♥
2♦....3♦...Pass....4♥
Pass..Pass..4♠?!

What would be your interpretation of 4♠? Can you come up with a sensible construction?

[helene_t]

A bunch of spades. Didn't want to open for some obscure reason. Didn't want to bid 3♠ before because it would be a fitnonjump. Didn't want to bid 4♠ before because hoping opps would end in 3♥ or something silly.

[neilkaz]

helene_t, on Oct 3 2008, 10:21 AM, said:

A bunch of spades. Didn't want to open for some obscure reason. Didn't want to bid 3♠ before because it would be a fitnonjump. Didn't want to bid 4♠ before because hoping opps would end in 3♥ or something silly.

We agree.

[hrothgar]

Partner thinks that 5♦X will score better than defending 4♥

AND

Partner wants a Spade lead if the opponents bid 5♥

♠ KQJ
♥ x
♦ xxxxx
♣ xxxx

[mr1303]

I hate it when partners make this type of bid.

BID EARLIER OR NOT AT ALL!!!

[Lobowolf]

hrothgar, on Oct 3 2008, 11:03 AM, said:

Partner thinks that 5♦X will score better than defending 4♥

AND

Partner wants a Spade lead if the opponents bid 5♥

♠ KQJ
♥ x
♦ xxxxx
♣ xxxx

Definitely agree. In some analogous situations, it would be "Bid 5♦, and here's where I have values if you have to make a bidding decision over 5♥." Given the vulnerability and partner's previous passes, I can't imagine it means something other than "Bid 5♦, and lead a spade against 5♥, if you have to."

[cherdano]

hrothgar, on Oct 3 2008, 10:03 AM, said:

Partner thinks that 5♦X will score better than defending 4♥

AND

Partner wants a Spade lead if the opponents bid 5♥

♠ KQJ
♥ x
♦ xxxxx
♣ xxxx

I think passing with this hand over 3♦ is crazy.

[SoTired]

What about KQJ x xxxx xxxxx and want to sac against 4H, but don't want to bid 4D and push them into 4H by revealing our fit. May not want to sac if they stop in 3H.

Partner had 2 chances to bid and I always try to assume partner is not insane. Lead-directing sac is only logical explanation.

It may also help partner determine whether to dbl if they take the push to 5H.

[gnasher]

He wants me to put dummy down.

[awm]

What would partner do with six spades and a bunch of small hearts? It seems quite possible that partner wouldn't open because his hand is too weak for 1♠ and he doesn't want to lose a heart fit by opening 2♠. When 3♦ comes around, you will probably take a 3♠ bid then as a fit non-jump. But when opponents bid 4♥ partner knows that you are a big favorite to have singleton or void heart (maybe a 3163 hand) and 4♠ will be at minimum a good sacrifice.

Of course it could also be the "sacrifice with lead direction" others have suggested, but in this case playing 4♠ undoubled is likely to be okay even if it's down a few. And opponents will usually double, and partner will run to 5♦, and everything will be fine.

[jdonn]

Maybe this just proves 'fit non-jumps' are stupid? No that couldn't be it.

[mikeh]

Not my problem

He thinks they were making 4♥, and I assume that I agree with him, since I did not double them

Accordingly, I don't care what he thinks he was showing, because we are not yet doubled... if we get doubled, and he was en route to 5♦, well, he gets another chance. And if they don't double, I assume that my vulnerable overcall will deliver a few tricks, and he presumably has something in spades, so we go down 400-700 undoubled against their 620. How bad can that be?

As for what he actually holds: he is on his own here.. he must be prepared for me to pass. Absent agreement, bids like this have to be natural: Jxxxxxxx x xxx x is consistent with the hand so far... and, who knows, maybe we make. He had a chance to lead direct earlier.. if he was planning to save over 4♥, he shouldn't pass 3♦.

[kenrexford]

If you cannot figure out that this is 100% obviously a lead-director with diamonds, but that it doesn't matter what you think because you can pass 4♠ whether it is doubled or not, then give up.

Just read Mike's response. Tee hee -- we agree 100%. Neither of us really care what partner has!

[pclayton]

I passed. I think I said some comment about "incomprehensible bidding'.

He held: T9xxxxx x xxxx x.

We got doubled and he STILL sat lol. He thought he was offering a choice between 4♠ and 5♦ and that I should have pulled with my: x Qxx AKQT9x Kxx. I was looking forward to defending 4♥. 4♠ was -500 on inept defense. It should have been a lot more since trump were 4-2, 5D is quite a good spot.

By the way, on the prior board he passed at green with xxx AKxxxxx x Qx so he seems to be something of an operator.

[TimG]

pclayton, on Oct 3 2008, 01:26 PM, said:

I passed. I think I said some comment about "incomprehensible bidding'.

He held: T9xxxxx x xxxx x.

my: x Qxx AKQT9x Kxx

trump were 4-2

I find it incomprehensible that there were 14 spades in the deck.

I also find it annoying that the point of the post seems to have been to tell us about how good you are and how bad your partner was.

[pclayton]

TimG, on Oct 3 2008, 10:36 AM, said:

I find it incomprehensible that there were 14 spades in the deck.

Trumps were 4-1, sorry. I think anyway, I tuned out the hand while it was being played. The defense was usually inept however.

Quote

I also find it annoying that the point of the post seems to have been to tell us about how good you are and how bad your partner was.

Do I really need to respond to this?

[mikeh]

Quote

Just read Mike's response.  Tee hee -- we agree 100%. 

Which one of us is the more shocked?

[dburn]

pclayton, on Oct 3 2008, 10:17 AM, said:

All Vul, Imps

Me....LHO...pard...RHO
-----    ----    Pass....1♥
2♦....3♦...Pass....4♥
Pass..Pass..4♠?!

What would be your interpretation of 4♠? Can you come up with a sensible construction?

Long bad spades, a few diamonds, and a death wish.

[dburn]

Oh, well. It turned out that partner had long bad spades, a few diamonds, and a death wish. That's the trouble with reading just the first post, writing an answer, and then finding that the original poster has already spilled the beans. If you're wrong you look a complete idiot; if you're right no one will believe that you didn't read all the other posts before posting your own.

Still, at least I would have pulled on pclayton's actual hand facing pclayton's actual partner. And at least someone for whose opinion I have much respect thinks that fit non-jumps are as stupid as I think they are, which is very stupid indeed.

[Lobowolf]

dburn, on Oct 3 2008, 04:12 PM, said:

Oh, well. It turned out that partner had long bad spades, a few diamonds, and a death wish. That's the trouble with reading just the first post, writing an answer, and then finding that the original poster has already spilled the beans. If you're wrong you look a complete idiot; if you're right no one will believe that you didn't read all the other posts before posting your own.

I believe you. Nice read.