[skjaeran]

Scoring: IMP

1♠ - 2♣
2♦ - 2NT
3♦ - 5♦
?

---

2NT=GF (2♠ and 3♣ would not have been forcing)

What do you expect partner to have?
What's your call?

[Echognome]

I would expect a 1=3=4=5 minimum game force.

It could be suitable hands for slam such as:
A QJx xxxx AKxxx
x AQx xxxx AQxxx

Or a not so suitable hands for slam such as:
x QJx JTxx AKQxx

I think we are somewhat on a guess. The question is on which of the above hands might partner have been more willing to cooperate with a 4♦ bid. My guess is that he would cooperate on all but the quackiest 2/1s, so I'm going to pass.

[cherdano]

IMO this jump should show good trumps but not all that much else in terms of slam suitability. I don't think partner has that...

[ArtK78]

I would pass 5♦. Even if we are not off 2 quick tricks, there may not be 12 tricks available.

[jdonn]

I don't like to answer questions like this since partner never has what I think he is supposed to. These jumps should so rarely be made. I will guess he has a spade void and bid 6♦.

[whereagles]

In theory, pard should have something like

Jx
xxx
Jxx
AKQJx

Since I'm not going to guess stuff, I'll just pass now.

[effervesce]

Pass. Bidding on could be right, but most likely wrong. Partner could have bid 4♦ with a decentish hand.

[kenrexford]

I have no idea what this shows with standard meanings.

For me, a jump to game in this sequence would be a picture bid, as some have suggested. However, that meaning is impossible, as I am looking at the A-K-Q in trumps. So, I would be reduced to coming up with the answer to what mistake partner just made.

Of course, knowing something about bidding styles, and cuebidding styles, would help tremendously...

[dicklont]

Pass, and I won't construct my partners hand, i'll see it soon enough.
He asks me not go any higher, else he would bid 4♦.
Besides that, the club void does not make me happy.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

If slam makes, partner should not have bid 5D.

I dont even think that making the 5D bid should
be allowed, 3D did not limit openers hand, it just
showed 5-5, hence responder should use 4D.
... this assumes that 4D has not been agreed as
RKCB.

I believe that you should always check for 6m, if
you are going to play 5m.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

whereagles, on Oct 13 2008, 06:14 PM, said:

In theory, pard should have something like

Jx
xxx
Jxx
AKQJx

Since I'm not going to guess stuff, I'll just pass now.

... and one could argue, that this is not enough to
force to game.
Ok the jacks are in partners suit, but still this is a
dead min. 2NT bid at best.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Maybe it would help to know, what 2H instead of 2NT
would have been, FSF ok, but inv.+ or game forcing?
And if the 2NT bid promised a stopper in hearts.

[skjaeran]

We're not a regular partnership, so not that many agreements.

2♥ would be 4th suit GF.
We use italian style cuebids, no picture jumps. 5♦ is weaker than any alternative over 3♦. If I'd bid 4♣ over 3♦ I'd intend that as a cuebid agreeing ♦s, partner would take it as a natural slam try, though.
3♦ over 2♣ would show a strong 5-5, thus this sequence shows a weaker hand, 11-15(16).

[jdonn]

skaeran, on Oct 14 2008, 11:09 AM, said:

5♦ is weaker than any alternative over 3♦.

Why didn't you say so

[whereagles]

P_Marlowe, on Oct 14 2008, 08:28 AM, said:

whereagles, on Oct 13 2008, 06:14 PM, said:

In theory, pard should have something like

Jx
xxx
Jxx
AKQJx

Since I'm not going to guess stuff, I'll just pass now.

... and one could argue, that this is not enough to
force to game.

True. But people do force with stuff like that. Maybe that's what pard's trying to say?

[kenrexford]

I'll hazard a guess, based on the new info.

♠Qx ♥Qx ♦Jxxx ♣AKQxx

I think he bid 2NT to see if I was 6-4 or was NT suitable.

Sure, I have a VERY strong hand contextually, being a maximum in the range. And, I like having K-empty rather than KQ in spades. However, one of two things should happen here. Either I upgrade this initially, or partner gives me space for when I have this hand. If I am supposed to guess now what to do, the bidding has gone wrong.

[skjaeran]

I held x QJ9 T98x AKJxx

I might have bid 3♥ or 4♦ over 3♦. 3♥ would have made it easy for partner as it was - he'd have jumped to a natural 4NT and I'd have signed off in 5♦.

As it went, partner raised to 6♦ after a long tank.

[mike777]

skaeran, on Oct 13 2008, 04:47 PM, said:

Dealer: East Vul: Both Scoring: IMP

♠ KT852 ♥ KT4 ♦ AKQ87 ♣

1♠ - 2♣ 2♦ - 2NT 3♦ - 5♦ ?

2NT=GF (2♠ and 3♣ would not have been forcing)

What do you expect partner to have?
What's your call?

ok easy 1nt semiforcing(pard may pass) over 1s.......your...style may be other.

[kenrexford]

skaeran, on Oct 15 2008, 03:20 AM, said:

I held x QJ9 T98x AKJxx

I might have bid 3♥ or 4♦ over 3♦. 3♥ would have made it easy for partner as it was - he'd have jumped to a natural 4NT and I'd have signed off in 5♦.

As it went, partner raised to 6♦ after a long tank.

That's one stretcher GF, but somewhat in the ballpark. I don't think partner should have bid again, however. Adding in the Quacks necessary to bump this into my comfort level does not help the slam at all.

[whereagles]

skaeran: perhaps you could have bid 3NT instead of 5♦. Unless you fetch pard with a singleton heart, 3NT rates to be at least the same odds as 5♦, if not better.

[han]

If you bid 2C you will have to GF, this hand does not seem strong enough after a 1S opening.

(Especially not when playing with someone who opens as light as Harald does!)