[Hanoi5]

You hold:

♠AQJT52
♥A7
♦---
♣AK876

Partner opens:

3♥ 3♠
3NT 4♣
4♠ 4NT
5♦X???

You also play multi. All red, partner opened the bidding dealt. 5♦ (0 or 3 KC in spades) was doubled.

(don't ask why you bid this way, just answer what you'd bid and whether this hand is best played in ♥ or ♠).

[Phil]

So, partner bid 3N (showing something in either clubs or diamonds (probably diamonds looking at my hand)) instead of raising spades, and now is taking a desperate preference to 4♠. Partner is quite likely 2-2 in the blacks. 4♠ would be a challenge across from a normal but unfitting xx, QJxxxxx, Kx, xx. The opponents have heard the bidding and will no doubt lead a trump enough of the time to make it a serious underdog.

We now unilaterally wade out to the Binsky since 4 was going to be dicey enough and partner has denied the ♠K and the ♦A.

Do we now play pard for the perfecto of 98, KJxxxxx, Kx, xx and pray for 3-3 clubs or no trump lead?

Nah, 5♠ will be enough fun for me.

[skjaeran]

I did not make a bid over 4♠ with this - that's pretty insane. And why aren't we playing in our best fit?

[Gerben42]

Might as well have bid 3♥ 6♥. We still can, of course. Partner is vulnerable and does not have xx QJxxxxx Kx xx. He may have

xx KQxxxxx xx Qx and 6♥ is pretty good. But since we're being confused by ourselves, 5♥ might be enough...

[pooltuna]

Just keycard for ♥ and bid 6 or 7♥ your hand needs to be dummy not his

[Hanoi5]

Quote

your hand needs to be dummy not his

Exactly what I was aiming at. Does this hand need to be dummy or is it better to play in our suit?

Let's see. Partner opened in a pre-emptive shopwing 7 cards. S/he's vulnerable so s/he should have a nice suit. However, they're also Vulnerable and the opening was made in first seat (not second where partner has to be more 'careful'). We have a two-suited hand with a void and only 2 cards supporting partner's suit. Can partner cope with having to ruff a diamond lead, and then losing either a trump or the spade finesse? I think I can if I play in spades...

Well, made a simulation 400 hands (enough?). If partner is serious (s/he has 7 good cards in hearts) hearts rate to play better than spades. If partner has only 6 hearts (not serious or opened with a weak 2) spades will fare better.

My conclusion: I won't open 3 with only 6 ugly cards and a doubleton in the other Major.

[ArtK78]

I would never have considered playing in any suit other than hearts.

The auction 3♥ - 6♥ is appealing on this hand. It might be a 5 or 7 hand, depending on the lead and the lie of the cards.

I suspect I just bid 6♥ at this point. I don't think we are losing 2 trump tricks.

[bid_em_up]

Hanoi5, on Jul 27 2009, 01:45 PM, said:

My conclusion: I won't open 3 with only 6 ugly cards and a doubleton in the other Major.

This, imo, is the wrong conclusion to reach on this hand.

The conclusion you should reach is that when holding a big hand and partner preempts, you should strive to play in partner's suit whenever it is a possibility. On this hand, all of your cards will help partner (including the ones you don't have, ie. the diamond void).

The same cannot be said about his hand being of any help to you in either of your suits.

[mikeh]

I agree with bid-em-up's comment.

I would not have bid spades at all.... the problem will be that if he raises, you are still guessing..... you won't even have exclusion available if he raises.

And if he doesn't raise... well, 3N is weird and unexpected, but I would NEVER show clubs after this... I mean, what were we thinking might happen if we did?

This hand is about hearts, with some interest in the spade K if we have room to find out about it.

If we were gamblers, we could assume that any keycard he has is the heart K rather than the diamond Ace.... we could use keycard.

A note: it is a common treatment amongst at least a large number of experts to use 4♣ in response to any 3-level preempt other than clubs as keycard, with a typical response structure of 0, 1, 1+Q, 2, 2+Q.

Then if we heard 1+Q, ask for Kings.

Or if we are super-scientific, maybe we play exclusion... but I wouldn't risk it since playing a 2=0 fit, from the short side, is unpleasant.

If we are not gamblers or super-scientists, just bid what is in front of our nose... 6♥ over 3♥.

[Fluffy]

My oppponent managed to go down in 4♥ on this hand O_o. How did anyone find the 3♥ opening on a dull 2632 with 2 outside queens?

[the hog]

mikeh, on Jul 28 2009, 03:25 AM, said:

I agree with bid-em-up's comment.

I would not have bid spades at all.... the problem will be that if he raises, you are still guessing..... you won't even have exclusion available if he raises.

And if he doesn't raise... well, 3N is weird and unexpected, but I would NEVER show clubs after this... I mean, what were we thinking might happen if we did?

This hand is about hearts, with some interest in the spade K if we have room to find out about it.

If we were gamblers, we could assume that any keycard he has is the heart K rather than the diamond Ace.... we could use keycard.

A note: it is a common treatment amongst at least a large number of experts to use 4♣ in response to any 3-level preempt other than clubs as keycard, with a typical response structure of 0, 1, 1+Q, 2, 2+Q.

Then if we heard 1+Q, ask for Kings.

Or if we are super-scientific, maybe we play exclusion... but I wouldn't risk it since playing a 2=0 fit, from the short side, is unpleasant.

If we are not gamblers or super-scientists, just bid what is in front of our nose... 6♥ over 3♥.

I agree with this and I guess defacto with Bid-em-up's post as well. Why are you trying to find a S fit? Bid 6H
Yes, we also play 4C over ant 3 level opening as KC with nearly the same steps. However our first step is "terrible opening".