[CSGibson]

Scoring: IMP

Uncontested Auction
1♦-3N,
4♥-?

---

Playing 2/1 with a reasonable partner.

What should partner have for the bidding? What's your plan?

[helene_t]

I think 5-6 reds, non-forcing slam try. I could very well be wrong.

[Cascade]

Natural 5=6 and therefore unsuitable for 3NT.

[Gerben42]

Quote

What should partner have for the bidding?

6♦ and 5♥.

Quote

What's your plan?

To get rid of the 3NT response in my system.
In the current hand, the bidding is too high for any plans. I will bid 5♣, showing a control just in case partner was serious.

[vang]

agree with 65 and agree with 5♣ (cue an Ace in face of a 65 hand)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

At least 6 diamonds.

It is a matter of philospophy, if 4H is based
on values or showes a shortage.

I would bid 4S.

If partner bids 5D, I will pass.

with kind regards
Marlowe

[mtvesuvius]

Partner should have 6♦ & 5♥.
I will probably bid 5♣, because:

1 - Partner only has 2 black suit cards, if the 2 black suit cards are in ♠, then 4♠ may be better, but in any other situation 5♣ will improve partner's hand more.
2 - Once again, shouldn't 4♠ be kickback here?
3 - My hand has just improved alot. Give partner: ♠ x ♥ AKxxx ♦ AQxxxx ♣ x... Partner should now bid 5♥ (I guess?) which I will bid 6♦ over. This is a much tougher bid at matchpoints, but luckily I don't have to make that decision...

I will also respect a 5♦ signoff by partner.

AJK

[Hanoi5]

This could be tricky. What if partner opened on x Kxxxx AQxxxx x? I'd also cue-bid, 4♠ or 5♣, not sure, though I tend to favore the first one. I have 6♦ in mind, though 6♥ might fare better. The real question is qhether partner has the aforementioned hand (or a similar one) or not.

[Fluffy]

What Gerben said, agree strongly on using 3NT for showing something else, like some kind of void.

[CSGibson]

Just curious: What would a 1♣-3N-5♥ sequence be? Would that be a strong slam-going 6-5 hand, or just an effort to confuse partner?

[gnasher]

5-6, and it doesn't show slam interest. If partner wants to make a slam try, he has to either bid 5♥ or give up on the heart suit and bid 4♦.

I don't see why anyone thinks that the hand has improved: ♠KQ and ♦J are wasted, and the heart holding is about as weak as it can be for the 3NT bid. This is probably towards the lower end of the range that partner expects, so it seems right to pass.

Of the two examples already given, x Kxxxx AQxxxx x and x AKxxx AQxxxx x, which one do you think is more likely? And isn't the second one at least close to a stronger move?

[han]

I'd expect partner to have something in between those too. IIt is true that our spade cards are probably wasted, but we did start with a maximum and 4-card diamond support. Slam is possible (x AKxxx Axxxxx x) but not likely. But I'd expect partner to sign off over 5C if she has less than that. At MPs I'd pass but at IMPs I think we can try 5C.

[mtvesuvius]

han, on Dec 15 2008, 03:30 PM, said:

I'd expect partner to have something in between those too. IIt is true that our spade cards are probably wasted, but we did start with a maximum and 4-card diamond support. Slam is possible (x AKxxx Axxxxx x) but not likely. But I'd expect partner to sign off over 5C if she has less than that. At MPs I'd pass but at IMPs I think we can try 5C.

I completely agree

(Another reason I hate matchpoints)

[CSGibson]

Next question: Is the hand

---

reasonable for the bidding?

[jdonn]

CSGibson, on Dec 15 2008, 07:45 PM, said:

Next question: Is the hand

---

reasonable for the bidding?

Sure why not. Our hand could have the major suits reversed.

[Winstonm]

Whatever happened to the idea of treating these weaker 56 hands as if they were 55 and opening the major? Did that idea die while I wasn't looking?

[jdonn]

Winstonm, on Dec 15 2008, 08:00 PM, said:

Whatever happened to the idea of treating these weaker 56 hands as if they were 55 and opening the major?  Did that idea die while I wasn't looking?

There is also some idea out there about opening your longest suit. Just because this bidder used one idea doesn't mean the other is dead.

It's even possible to use your judgement to use either 'idea' on any given hand depending on factors such as suit quality, which this bidder may well have done, and quite reasonably I would say.

[Winstonm]

jdonn, on Dec 15 2008, 08:56 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Dec 15 2008, 08:00 PM, said:

Whatever happened to the idea of treating these weaker 56 hands as if they were 55 and opening the major?  Did that idea die while I wasn't looking?

There is also some idea out there about opening your longest suit. Just because this bidder used one idea doesn't mean the other is dead.

It's even possible to use your judgement to use either 'idea' on any given hand depending on factors such as suit quality, which this bidder may well have done, and quite reasonably I would say.

I was actually serious. The tide could easily have turned to opening your long suit when 65 - and as little involved as I am these days I would not have known time had once again passed me by.

Good to see I'm not totally irrelevant yet.

[H_KARLUK]

I will never know partner's has reverse ability or not with given auction. But I would feel myself well with a slow approach. Such as 2D.

I think partner trying to point out he dislike 3N with his bicolors collection.

[Fluffy]

On my style, opening 1♦ denies 5c major, for example this sequence 1♦-3NT-4♥ would show a 7-4 or strong 6-4

Makes some things easier, specially when the auction starts 1♥-2♣-X-3♣, or 1♥-1♠-X-2♠.