[Hanoi5]

You hold this beauty:

♠652
♥T652
♦KJ53
♣T5

Exact spots. You're vulnerable, they're not. Bidding goes:

1♣ Pa 1NT Pa
2♠ Pa 4♣  Pa
4♠ X  Pa ???

Apparently 4♣ was not alerted, but it surely was some sort of cue-bid. What would you bid if:

a. You were told at some point that opener's bidding indicated a 6-5 in the black suits with a strong hand (which I guess is the normal meaning).

b. You were told by your screen-mate (responder), 'Are you going to pass? It's a 5-6 strong hand, you know...'

c. You and your partner are World Class players.

[MFA]

I don't understand the explanations, can you be more specific?

[skjaeran]

We've passed throughout and partner doubles 4♠ red vs white.
What on earth do I care for opps explanations here. Partner told me he's beating 4♠, surely I pass.

Coming in with a t/o double now is totally insane - then he'd have doubled 2♠. Obviously opps screwed up somehow, or I'm looking for a new partner, world class or not.

[dicklont]

A: Pass
B: Pass, but now I'm wondering what's happening
C: That would only be on BBO were I can choose my own level, or in my dreams.

What am I supposed to do other than pass?
When partner wants me to choose a red suit he bids 4NT, now he expects it's going down.

As a world class player I would probably have specific agreements about this situation and then I would know what to do without a doubt.

[helene_t]

If there turn out to be 18 spades in the pack I call the director. For now I just trust p.

[OleBerg]

a) Pass.
b) Pass, and scout for nearby directors, in case dummy reveals that the comments were coffe-housing.
c) I already said I'd pass.

[helene_t]

OleBerg, on Feb 5 2009, 03:42 PM, said:

c) I already said I'd pass.

I admire your modesty

[JLOL]

Hanoi5, on Feb 5 2009, 08:52 AM, said:

Apparently 4♣ was not alerted, but it surely was some sort of cue-bid. What would you bid if:

LOL

[FrancesHinden]

Hanoi5, on Feb 5 2009, 01:52 PM, said:

Apparently 4♣ was not alerted, but it surely was some sort of cue-bid.

Surely? I'd expect it to be some sort of good hand for play in clubs. The old "natural limit bid" thing...

a. Pass
b. Pass, and potentially call the TD for a coffee-housing PP (depends on how well I know my opponents)
c. How is this supposed to change whether I pass or not?

[gnasher]

Hanoi5, on Feb 5 2009, 02:52 PM, said:

What would you bid if ... You and your partner are World Class players.

How would I know?

[jdonn]

gnasher, on Feb 5 2009, 10:49 AM, said:

Hanoi5, on Feb 5 2009, 02:52 PM, said:

What would you bid if ... You and your partner are World Class players.

How would I know?

Hehe good point. Obviously if everyone knew what they would do if they were a world class player, everyone would be a world class player!

Anyway I have no idea why this problem is here, what could I do but pass? Even if partner pulled the wrong card and meant to pass I don't see what I could do but pass.

[OleBerg]

Hard to come up with a distribution where the bidding makes sense; this is the best I can do:

Scoring: IMP

---

This assumes NS has some suit quality restrictions on overcalls.


Can't help thinking this silly thought:

Maybe, when the trey was pushed under after the 1NT call, the top card became slightly tilted, so that LHO thinks the bidding has gone:

1♣ - 1♠
2♠ - 4♣
4♠ (X)

Opponents have something like a 21-count 7-card-fit, and partner is stacked!

To silly?

[Hanoi5]

Scoring: MP

---

This was the full hand. East bid 5♦, which was doubled and paid only 800, though it was a complete zero for E/W. E/W complained that West was told that 2♠ was a reverse and that it showed a 6-5 and that was the reason for bidding 5♦. They wanted 4♠x -2 as the result...

[jdonn]

Hanoi5, on Feb 5 2009, 11:34 AM, said:

They wanted 4♠x -2 as the result...

I think they should change their request to getting some sort of deal on a partnership lobotomy.

[TimG]

skaeran, on Feb 5 2009, 09:19 AM, said:

Obviously opps screwed up somehow, or I'm looking for a new partner, world class or not.

I don't understand this attitude. Surely your criteria for a good partner does not include "never blunders".

[skjaeran]

TimG, on Feb 5 2009, 05:47 PM, said:

skaeran, on Feb 5 2009, 09:19 AM, said:

Obviously opps screwed up somehow, or I'm looking for a new partner, world class or not.

I don't understand this attitude. Surely your criteria for a good partner does not include "never blunders".

Huh?

Pleas don't quote out of context. What I meant was perfectly clear if you read my complete post.

There's a great difference between occasional blunders that we all make (me and my partners included) than the insanity I was talking about.

[TimG]

skaeran, on Feb 5 2009, 09:19 AM, said:

We've passed throughout and partner doubles 4♠ red vs white.
What on earth do I care for opps explanations here. Partner told me he's beating 4♠, surely I pass.

Coming in with a t/o double now is totally insane - then he'd have doubled 2♠. Obviously opps screwed up somehow, or I'm looking for a new partner, world class or not.

Well, here's the whole quote. Sure sounds to me like you're looking for a new partner if your current partner's judgment on this hand proves incorrect.

Even if partner's judgment on this hand amounts to a colossal brain fart, I like to think that a partnership will survive one of those.

[RichMor]

Hanoi5, on Feb 5 2009, 11:34 AM, said:

Scoring: MP

---

This was the full hand. East bid 5♦, which was doubled and paid only 800, though it was a complete zero for E/W. E/W complained that West was told that 2♠ was a reverse and that it showed a 6-5 and that was the reason for bidding 5♦. They wanted 4♠x -2 as the result...

Yes, NS should get the result for 4♠X down 2.

Yes, EW should get the result for -800.

Seems only right that both pairs get a bad score

[jdonn]

RichMor, on Feb 5 2009, 03:31 PM, said:

Yes, NS should get the result for 4♠X down 2.

Yes, EW should get the result for -800.

Seems only right that both pairs get a bad score

If the EW result was due to (I forget the exact wording) a stupid, ridiculous, irrational, wild, gambling action, then NS should not have their score changed. All you can do to them is give some kind of procedural penalty for a bad explanation, as well as for responder's extraneous comment (b. in the original post) if you care to.

[hrothgar]

Doesn't the decision to adjust the score depend on North - South's partnership agreement regarding the definition of the 2♠ bid?

If I had to guess what happened, I'd assume the following:

1. South doesn't have a clue how to bid and
2. North wasn't in on the joke

Note: The following is all complete specualtion, but I've seen it happen a lot:

North - South probably agreed that they were playing SAYC or 2/1 or standard or some other convenient system summary. Hell, that might not have even agreed to a system...

North knows that the sequence 1♣ - 1N - 2♠ promises real shape

When asked about the meaning of the bid, he gave the correct explanation according to the system he thought they were playing

South is clueless, probably doesn't know any of the systems that he processes to play, made what he thought was the systematic bid, but actually misbid