[jillybean]

Following on from my earlier posts, I'm interested in what bbf'ers would do with this.

---

[mr1303]

5C. More is excessive and hanging partner at this vulnerability. Who knows, they may bid over 5C, after which I start licking my lips

[Hanoi5]

5♣. Could partner have the ♦A?

[ggwhiz]

Partners clubs are so feeble that 5♣ must have a play.

On some days I might try to walk the dog to try and get doubled but would need to reverse say my diamonds and spades to bid 3♦ forcing.

[CSGibson]

5♣. There is a large difference between a stiff and Jx, both in terms of NT play and potential suit play, and that tilts me toward the 11 trick game.

[neilkaz]

I'm also a 5♣ bidder.

[PhilKing]

Well assuming 4♦ is kickback, I could bid 4NT as more cooperative slam try. Partner could have Kx x Qxx QTxxxxx.

But it's a bit speculative, so I will have to just settle for five. Partner's spade and diamond holdings are just as likely to be the other way round, and I can't find out.

[Cyberyeti]

PhilKing, on 2012-December-13, 11:12, said:

Well assuming 4♦ is kickback, I could bid 4NT as more cooperative slam try. Partner could have Kx x Qxx QTxxxxx.

But it's a bit speculative, so I will have to just settle for five. Partner's spade and diamond holdings are just as likely to be the other way round, and I can't find out.

At this vul, x, xx, xxxx, QJ10xxx is more likely for me and partner (yes we consider first seat as a gun position), 5 is plenty. If you are reasonably constructive in first seat, there's more of a case for bidding more.

[RunemPard]

I am starting to think that if Ms. Beans picked up - - AKQJT98765432 - she would scorn a little bit...

[MrAce]

Interesting hand, when pd has 3 or more diamonds missing a slam is very likely. But as PhilKing said i also dunno how to investigate it, unless 4♦ is splinter ...

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2012-December-13, 14:16, said:

Interesting hand, when pd has 3 or more diamonds missing a slam is very likely. But as PhilKing said i also dunno how to investigate it, unless 4♦ is splinter ...

Bid 3♦, see if partner raises ?

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-December-13, 15:03, said:

Bid 3♦, see if partner raises ?

If you are confident that he will not correct your final bid to 5-6♦ then go for it. Holding AK of clubs myself, i expect pd to correct it to 6 ♦ more often once i start 3♦ and that would be the right decision if i had real ♦ suit and a different hand.

[CSGibson]

MrAce, on 2012-December-13, 14:16, said:

Interesting hand, when pd has 3 or more diamonds missing a slam is very likely. But as PhilKing said i also dunno how to investigate it, unless 4♦ is splinter ...

Very likely seems like an overbid. Even if partner had Q seventh of clubs, 3 diamonds, and an outside king, there's a 50% chance the king is the king of diamonds. 6 is a big enough parlay that I am not willing to try and screw around with the auction to figure it out.

[jillybean]

CSGibson, on 2012-December-13, 10:35, said:

5♣. There is a large difference between a stiff and Jx, both in terms of NT play and potential suit play, and that tilts me toward the 11 trick game.

Thanks Chris, I wanted to check that not every decent hand opposite partners preempt is a "bid 3N in tempo" hand.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2012-December-13, 15:14, said:

If you are confident that he will not correct your final bid to 5-6♦ then go for it. Holding AK of clubs myself, i expect pd to correct it to 6 ♦ more often once i start 3♦ and that would be the right decision if i had real ♦ suit and a different hand.

Depends on your methods, it's initially a no-trump probe for us, so partner is likely to bid a 3 card major next and is not going to play me for the world in diamonds if he raises and I put him back into clubs.

[SteveMoe]

I expect partner's 1st seat preempts GREEN to be "loose". Partner knows 3{clubs] is the most effecctive opening bid so s/he might even have only 6 cards. I'm tempted to bid 3N at MPs and lean toward 5♣ at IMPs scoring. I do not think 6♣ is in the picture as partner only needs 6 probable winners to open 3. 5♣ also runs a risk of 3 losers in the side suits if pard has 3Q's and is 2=2=3=6, say.

Yes, I'm counting on the major suit opening lead bias.

[Siegmund]

An interesting thread. Frankly amazed to see so many people considering going slamming.


I happen to have been the one who held this hand at jillybean's table. My partner and I have a firm "rule of 2, 3, and 4" agreement... partner should have 5 tricks. QJ-7 in clubs and no other face card, or QJ-6 or J-7 clubs and one stray face card. My immediate reaction was to pass, 5C having very little chance. (OK, QJ-7 clubs and 3 or 4 diamonds maybe is not "very little" but not remotely close to 50%, I didn't think.) I'll be the first to admit that 3NT is not a standard bid here, relying on the possibility of a major-suit lead (with 6 clubs and a diamond stopper an outside chance.) I don't know whether I really had a 50% chance for 3NT or not.

I have absolutely no problem with people thinking 3NT is crazy. I do wonder just how timid your partners are if you think any game at all is viable.

Bidding 3D and seeing if it gets raised is quite an interesting idea (as a way to see if FIVE clubs will make), if that's an option and you can trust partner not to correct 5C to 5D. With this particular partner, a 3D response would have asked for a 3-card major, as described in Andersen and Zenkel.

[ggwhiz]

Siegmund, on 2012-December-13, 20:19, said:

An interesting thread. Frankly amazed to see so many people considering going slamming.

I have absolutely no problem with people thinking 3NT is crazy. I do wonder just how timid your partners are if you think any game at all is viable.

I'm with you on the slamming part but not on the timid partner bit. Can your partner not bid 3♣ with QJ 7th and a side king cause it's too good?

We stretch our 3 of a major bids with some shapely hands too bad for a weak 2 but not with clubs unless you can kamikaze 4 of them. Since pard didn't do that with a bad suit leaving 3nt open (to me AND them) they should have a side piece or two. Maybe not the right stuff but.......

[BillPatch]

Another conventional use of 3♦ over the 3♣ opening is artificial asking for a stopper. 3 of major shows that stopper, 3NT the diamond stop, and 4 clubs no outside stopper. A safer way to reach a good 3NT.

[Siegmund]

Quote

I'm with you on the slamming part but not on the timid partner bit. Can your partner not bid 3♣ with QJ 7th and a side king cause it's too good?

Many such hands we would open 4C. Perhaps not the 7222s or the QJ65432 hands. QJ-7 and an ace is certainly not possible (for us.)