[Cyberyeti]

Scoring: IMP

What do you bid if partner opens:

a)4♣
b)5♣

---

[helene_t]

5♣ I raise to 6.

4♣ I probably only raise to 5. Maybe 6. Depends on partner's style

[andy_h]

The contract will rest in 5♣ in both cases for me given the conditions.

[aguahombre]

6C on both. Seems like I have enough covers to allow for a club loser.

But, as Helene says, would be nice to know what 4C looks like with this partner. Guessing 8 clubs --seven of them being tricks.

However, opposite MY partner I would bid 7H/4C

[whereagles]

4/5 level openings are usually made on 8 cards or a 7-4, so the side losers rate to be all covered. It's just a matter of asking pard how good the trump suit is. Using standard methods, it's 4NT over 4♣ and, I guess, 5NT over 5♣.

[Fluffy]

pass 4 clubs, this is a broken suit, Q109 KJ9 or something like. KJ10 and QJ10 are possible though.


against 5 club opening I am raising to 6, dont have the 5NT agreement.

[andy_h]

Fluffy, are you willing to risk passing out 4♣ at imps? Even 7330 is possible with AQ109.

[Cyberyeti]

OK, partner has either:

10, xxx, x AQJ109xxx

or

10, xxx, x, AQ987xxx

Can the 6 bidders distinguish between the two over 4♣ ?

We were playing a teams match and minding our own business as our opps bid 4♣-4♠. Partner led a diamond and after a misdefence this scrambled home on a trump endplay. Prize to anybody who led a trump from Q9xx, big prize to anyone who led the Q to kill the A♣.

Team mates bid 5♣-6♣.

The point of the example hands is that 4♦ would have been RKCB for our opps, so they could find out that partner had the AQ♣.

The match was won by the team that got this right by 1 IMP.

[aguahombre]

Suit quality agreements are a good thing.

[pooltuna]

helene_t, on Feb 20 2010, 11:12 AM, said:

5♣ I raise to 6.

4♣ I probably only raise to 5. Maybe 6. Depends on partner's style

This seems reasonable IMO

[Jlall]

4C I would definitely raise to 5. If partner has something like 8 to the KQ or even 8 to the ace game is good. Even 8 to the QJT9 is good.

5C I would pass, partner has a lot of 8-4 hands that are possible (esp white/red), and most people aren't as conservative as me in opening 5 white red and have a lot of stuff like 1138 or 0238 also with pretty crappy suits, and partner can basically have any 9 card suit. It's possible his trumps are playable for 1 loser obviously, but a lot of time they won't be.

[rogerclee]

I would raise 4C to 5C and 5C to 6C.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

a) 6C - ok, being green vs. red, I am not 100% sure that it makes,
but it will have a fair chance of making
b) 7C - unless being green vs. red, at this vulnerability, I am just
raising to 6C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[jdonn]

Like most I raise each one level. Who knows, the opponents have no aces to lead so maybe on 5♣ p 6♣ RHO will lead a trump into his partner's KQx/KJx/AJx (or from Qxx if he is me) etc. even when it was wrong of me to raise. I could just as easily have a singleton or doubleton club and need a ruff as a void, in fact it's probably even more likely.

[MFA]

I would also raise both of them one level. Except that I play 4♦ keycards over 4♣, so if partner has 2 I try slam and hope for an 8-bagger or 7 with some body.

[Cyberyeti]

P_Marlowe, on Feb 21 2010, 04:20 PM, said:

Hi,

a) 6C - ok, being green vs. red, I am not 100% sure that it makes,
    but it will have a fair chance of making
b) 7C - unless being green vs. red, at this vulnerability, I am just
    raising to 6C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

7♣ is just absurd, partner gets dealt 10 to the KQJ occasionally, but asking for keycards then bidding 7 opposite 2+Q is not silly.

Partner and I were discussing this and wondered about using a modified ask that would say something about suit quality.

A possible variant:

4♣-4♦

4♥-no A or K, KQJ or AQJ 4♠ reasks, 4N=none, 5C=none + side ace
4♠-K or A without Q or AKQ, 4N reasks, 5♣ = K or A without Q
4N-KQ or AQ without J

Do other pairs use enquiries like this in other circumstances (partner opens 3♥ and you have a big hand with a stiff king of partner's suit for example). It seems this should be a fertile area for improvement on standard methods.

[Fluffy]

andy_h, on Feb 21 2010, 10:11 AM, said:

Fluffy, are you willing to risk passing out 4♣ at imps? Even 7330 is possible with AQ109.

Rethinking a bit, maybe I was too pessimistic, but partner having good 7 clubs is not my style at all, not even decent 8 ones, we never bypass 3NT with a minor when it is an option.

[P_Marlowe]

Cyberyeti, on Feb 21 2010, 07:25 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Feb 21 2010, 04:20 PM, said:

Hi,

a) 6C - ok, being green vs. red, I am not 100% sure that it makes,
     but it will have a fair chance of making
7C - unless being green vs. red, at this vulnerability, I am just
     raising to 6C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

7♣ is just absurd, partner gets dealt 10 to the KQJ occasionally, but asking for keycards then bidding 7 opposite 2+Q is not silly.

Partner and I were discussing this and wondered about using a modified ask that would say something about suit quality.

A possible variant:

4♣-4♦

4♥-no A or K, KQJ or AQJ 4♠ reasks, 4N=none, 5C=none + side ace
4♠-K or A without Q or AKQ, 4N reasks, 5♣ = K or A without Q
4N-KQ or AQ without J

Do other pairs use enquiries like this in other circumstances (partner opens 3♥ and you have a big hand with a stiff king of partner's suit for example). It seems this should be a fertile area for improvement on standard methods.

Hi,

If you can check for KC, do it.

If I cant, I bid 7C, if p opened KQJ to 10th, so be it.

With kind regards
Marlowe