[hanp]

1NT - (2D*) - 2NT**
3C - 4C
5C - 6C

1NT was 15-17, 2D showed a major, 2NT showed clubs, invitational or better, but opener wasn't sure and thought for a long time before bidding 3C. Responder intended 4C as forcing but opener thought it was invitational. Opener again thought for a long time and bid 5C.

Responder's hand: AHx AJx x J109xxx, 6C makes as the cards lie.

The opponents fumingly called the director, claiming responder made use of UI. Your verdict?

[TimG]

Were these explanation given during the auction? I'm going to assume not since there is no reason for opener to explain his thinking during the auction.

From responder's point of view, opener took a while to bid 3♣ which means that opener is unsure whether he wants to bid 3♣ (and possibly play there) or accept the invitation. Responder has UI from this first hesitation that opener is not absolutely minimum.

After responder's forcing 4♣ bid, what are opener's obligations? I would expect that opener should cue-bid a first round control on the way to 5♣. The slow 5♣ suggests that opener has either bypassed a side first round control or has very strong clubs and did not know how to show them. Responder has UI from this hesitation that opener likely has the ♦A or very good clubs.

I think it is possible to construct a balanced 15-17 HCP hand, consistent with the auction, lacking both the ♦A and the ♣A. So, passing 5♣ must be a logical alternative. Bidding 6♣ is suggested over pass by the UI available from opener's slow 5♣.

1) UI available;
2) pass is a LA;
3) 6♣ suggested over pass by the UI.

So, I'd roll it back to 5♣.

[jdonn]

Maybe it doesn't make a difference but what is AHx?

[TimG]

jdonn, on Jan 12 2010, 01:52 PM, said:

Maybe it doesn't make a difference but what is AHx?

The 'H' and 'J' are next to each other on the keyboard?

[jdonn]

TimG, on Jan 12 2010, 01:55 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jan 12 2010, 01:52 PM, said:

Maybe it doesn't make a difference but what is AHx?

The 'H' and 'J' are next to each other on the keyboard?

I thought it was going to be one of those problems like:

Give the smallest value of H for which passing 5♣ is not a logical alternative.
- 2 through 10
- J
- Q
- K
- Passing is an LA no matter what card H is.

[ggwhiz]

I agree with rolling it back to 5C.

Nothing wrong with raising 3C to 4C after the first tank (It might even risk playing it there).

If you were going to drive to slam, blast it after 3C. I think I would allow that as the first tank could be anything from a desire to bid NT or diamonds or just to remember methods. That's just a guess, if others care to comment.

What is NOT kosher, is inviting with 4C and then carrying on over a tank sign-off.

[blackshoe]

Responder didn't invite with 4♣ — he thought 4♣ was forcing.

Is pass an LA to 3C? Is 3NT?

[jdonn]

blackshoe, on Jan 12 2010, 05:26 PM, said:

Responder didn't invite with 4♣ — he thought 4♣ was forcing.

Is pass an LA to 3C? Is 3NT?

Huh, isn't the question whether pass is an LA to 6♣?

[ggwhiz]

Quote

Responder didn't invite with 4♣ — he thought 4♣ was forcing.

If 4C was forcing (to at least game) it was a slam try and 5C denied interest except for the tank and that makes the 6C bid egregious.

WooHoo, first time I've ever used that word!

[blackshoe]

When did we decide that the first tank was irrelevant?

[helene_t]

H means King of course.

Anyway, agree with 5♣+1.

[campboy]

I don't think there are logical alternatives to 4♣ (ok, 4♦ might be if it is a splinter, but the UI doesn't suggest 4♣ over 4♦), but passing is certainly an LA to 6♣ (and 6♣ is suggested). So I agree with everyone else.

[bluejak]

ggwhiz, on Jan 12 2010, 11:57 PM, said:

If 4C was forcing (to at least game) it was a slam try and 5C denied interest except for the tank and that makes the 6C bid egregious.

WooHoo, first time I've ever used that word!

Let me offer my congratulations.

[shyams]

Can I ask if this was a MPs game? Wouldn't responder have more reason to bid 6C at MPs?