[CamHenry]

This is the last round of a club pairs game; you're coming in with 58% and second place. Your basic system is Acol, as is the opponents'. North (LHO) deals and opens your suit. Your call?

---

If you double, the auction proceeds:

---

Now what?

[Codo]

I guess I had bid 4 ♥- must be natural in ACOL land, I doubt that I had find a better place by doubling- and had been wrong if I look at your second part. The problem with double is that I have no idea how I can convince partner that 4 ♥ is our best spot if he bids some number of clubs. In these cases 4 ♥ sounds like a control/excusion/SI, but surely not as natural. If you have a way to handle this problem, doubling is surely better.

Now I would bid 4 ♣ SI or 5♣ if this is exclusion. I wolud surey not stop short of slam.
If forced to guess later in the bidding, I guess 6 ♦.

[Cyberyeti]

Codo, on 2012-October-24, 04:34, said:

I guess I had bid 4 ♥- must be natural in ACOL land, I doubt that I had find a better place by doubling- and had been wrong if I look at your second part. The problem with double is that I have no idea how I can convince partner that 4 ♥ is our best spot if he bids some number of clubs. In these cases 4 ♥ sounds like a control/excusion/SI, but surely not as natural. If you have a way to handle this problem, doubling is surely better.

Now I would bid 4 ♣ SI or 5♣ if this is exclusion. I wolud surey not stop short of slam.
If forced to guess later in the bidding, I guess 6 ♦.

Partner's made a free bid of 2♦, he should have something respectable. It would not totally surprise me if opener was 0625/0535 and we lose the first 3 tricks to ruffs with more to come, but you can't legislate for everything. I think partner virtually has to have 5 diamonds given that he's going to be pretty thin in values. 5♣ exclusion is not silly, but you have to see the potential pitfalls here. Give partner xxx, x, Qxxxx, Kxxx which I would have thought is around the right ballpark. How is this going to play on a club lead ? You have no way back to hand to draw trumps as you will be overruffed in hearts unless your diamond intermediates are good and you can't bang down ♦AJ as there will be a club to cash.

I think I'd bid 5♣ exclusion over 3♣ and pass 5♦ (playing 3041 as we do helps here, much more awkward if you play 1430).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

#1 X, maybe I get enlightened in the round that follows
#2 I got enlightened: they have a club fit, we most likely a 9 card fit, hence we have a 8 card fit,
the fit suit being diamonds, partner is not broke => 4C, this should be a splinter, setting diamonds
as trumps, if you fear partner passes, bid 5D or 6D, all you need is the King or the Queen.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rhm]

5♣

Partner can not have much except diamond honors and length there.
Partner has at least 5 diamonds with both honors or 6 diamonds and the king.
I may not make it, but I will not stop below 6♦.
I am more worried that we belong in 7♦.
I am not worried whether RHO has a void in hearts, since he will be on lead.

Rainer Herrmann

[gszes]

Even if i had a bid like 5n that could ask for 2 of the top 3 dia honors and
6 dia, I am not sure I would want to play 7d. If rho were to lead a
trump from even 9xx p will need at least one outside entry to allow for a
club ruff and still safely pull trumps. Given that we do not have
the ability to find out how many dia p has i think trying for 7 is a poor idea
and just bidding

6d

should cover just about any semi normal looking 2d bid p might have. Of course
I may just be a pessimist and 5n will work wonderfully when p has
JTx J KQ9xx xxxx the opps x and lho leads a heart and alls well that ends well.

[dwar0123]

I'd bid 5nt.

I've never bid a grandslam force before, but this is what I thought one would look like.

I wouldn't give a rats a$@ what the rest of the field might be doing, I don't pass up chances to do things I've never done before

[Cyberyeti]

dwar0123, on 2012-October-24, 13:48, said:

I'd bid 5nt.

I've never bid a grandslam force before, but this is what I thought one would look like.

I wouldn't give a rats a$@ what the rest of the field might be doing, I don't pass up chances to do things I've never done before

I much prefer to have 5♥ available as GSF (4♥ would be exclusion for us) to get a full set of responses in, but 5♣ exclusion gets the same info and you can pass out in 5♦ if partner shows 0 if you play 3041 if you want to.

[CamHenry]

Well, I'm glad Exclusion has its adherents. Unfortunately I don't play it with this partner, so I doubled 3♣ to show unspecified extras: 4♥ was likely to engender panic-then-5♦. Oppo then bid 5♣, which I doubled for a 70% board.

Partner's hand was

---

and careful play by E makes the grand; most pairs played some failing contract by W as the club's general level doesn't cover 6-0 heart breaks and 4-0 diamond breaks...

[Cyberyeti]

CamHenry, on 2012-October-25, 11:55, said:

Well, I'm glad Exclusion has its adherents. Unfortunately I don't play it with this partner, so I doubled 3♣ to show unspecified extras: 4♥ was likely to engender panic-then-5♦. Oppo then bid 5♣, which I doubled for a 70% board.

Partner's hand was

---

and careful play by E makes the grand; most pairs played some failing contract by W as the club's general level doesn't cover 6-0 heart breaks and 4-0 diamond breaks...

My partner would have woken me up by overcalling 3♦, so I'd be in 7, probably in an unopposed auction from that point on