[Apollo81]

Unfavorable, MPs

♠KQJx
♥---
♦AKxxx
♣AKxx

(2♥)-p-(3♥)-Dbl
(p)-3♠-(p)-??

[pbleighton]

Oh, dear. 4m is natural, not cue, and 4NT is tough with a void.

4S, and hope we don't make 6. Partner didn't jump, after all.

Peter

[mr1303]

Can I try 4H here as a slam try? I'll certainly do that, although getting partner's co-operation may be difficult.

Opposite:

Axxxx
xxxx
xx
xx

7S looks to have good play.

[mikeh]

This is very tough, since slam can make opposite some very weak hands, but my experience suggests lowering your expectations.

There are warning signs about. RHO, at favourable, bid only 3♥, so there is a strong likelihood that partner is 4=4 in the majors. On a bad day, he is 3=4, but life's too short to cater to that nightmare.

If he is 4=4, you may have some serious handling charges: I would not be the least bit surprised (disappointed, yes, surprised, no) to see even 4♠ fail.

Of course, we are going to game, no matter how pessimistic we may feel, and I am going to make one slam move: 4♥.

It is possible that a conservative partner will bid 4♠ on hands on which slam is making, but I would expect most good partners to make a move of some kind on most (but not all) hands on which slam is good, as opposed to merely making (Yes, I know: any slam that makes is a good slam).

The hand doesn't warrant a 5-level adventure by myself.

And, yes, I can picture hands on which partner properly signs off and we do miss a decent slam. When you realize that you can't get every hand right, the game is a lot more relaxing.. and you'll end up getting more of them right, as well.

[skjaeran]

mikeh, on Jun 19 2007, 10:01 PM, said:

This is very tough, since slam can make opposite some very weak hands, but my experience suggests lowering your expectations.

There are warning signs about. RHO, at favourable, bid only 3♥, so there is a strong likelihood that partner is 4=4 in the majors. On a bad day, he is 3=4, but life's too short to cater to that nightmare.

If he is 4=4, you may have some serious handling charges: I would not be the least bit surprised (disappointed, yes, surprised, no) to see even 4♠ fail.

Of course, we are going to game, no matter how pessimistic we may feel, and I am going to make one slam move: 4♥.

It is possible that a conservative partner will bid 4♠ on hands on which slam is making, but I would expect most good partners to make a move of some kind on most (but not all) hands on which slam is good, as opposed to merely making (Yes, I know: any slam that makes is a good slam).

The hand doesn't warrant a 5-level adventure by myself.

And, yes, I can picture hands on which partner properly signs off and we do miss a decent slam. When you realize that you can't get every hand right, the game is a lot more relaxing.. and you'll end up getting more of them right, as well.

Nicely put. Wholeheartedly agree.

[Fluffy]

Mike said it all

[whereagles]

4♠. I consider this a no brainer

[jdonn]

Wow I am amazed at the conservativeness. I have noted a number of times to not reach for the perfect hand when preempted, but this is way to good. Are people expecting partner to move over 4♥ with five small spades and a minor suit queen? Sign me up for 4♥ then 5♥, I'll give up if partner does nothing over those.

[whereagles]

Maybe I'm being conservative, but I've been there before and last time 5♠ went down 1

[mike777]

Apollo81, on Jun 19 2007, 02:39 PM, said:

Unfavorable, MPs

♠KQJx
♥---
♦AKxxx
♣AKxx

(2♥)-p-(3♥)-Dbl
(p)-3♠-(p)-??

Prefer 4H not double and then 5H. I like this hand.

[jgo]

I'll try 4H here. If partner now bids 4S, I pass.

[neilkaz]

jdonn, on Jun 19 2007, 04:11 PM, said:

Wow I am amazed at the conservativeness. I have noted a number of times to not reach for the perfect hand when preempted, but this is way to good. Are people expecting partner to move over 4♥ with five small spades and a minor suit queen? Sign me up for 4♥ then 5♥, I'll give up if partner does nothing over those.

I agree with you 100% and 4♥ followed by 5♥ really has to be 1st round control in ♥ and a very S/I hand. If PD cannot move after that, he must have stretched his 3♠ call and I'll pass 5♠.

Honestly if God came down and told me that I was going to die after my next bid (ie I only have 1 bid) I'd just call 6♠ and not think it is a "dog" to make.

.. neilkaz ..

[pclayton]

Wow - this is the mother of all takeout doubles. Spade length and the right yarb gives us a possible slam. 4H is possible, but how is pard ever going to cooperate? I'm not going to stay fixed here.

Furthermore,, why is it everytime we hold a monster we assume pard is dead broke?

Pard probably has 4 hearts but he might have 3 too. Do you always bash a weak 2 into game when you have 10 trump? I dont.

I have great respect for a direct 6S, but I'll try a direct 5H ekcb first.

[mikeh]

neilkaz, on Jun 19 2007, 09:19 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 19 2007, 04:11 PM, said:

Wow I am amazed at the conservativeness. I have noted a number of times to not reach for the perfect hand when preempted, but this is way to good. Are people expecting partner to move over 4♥ with five small spades and a minor suit queen? Sign me up for 4♥ then 5♥, I'll give up if partner does nothing over those.

I agree with you 100% and 4♥ followed by 5♥ really has to be 1st round control in ♥ and a very S/I hand. If PD cannot move after that, he must have stretched his 3♠ call and I'll pass 5♠.

Honestly if God came down and told me that I was going to die after my next bid (ie I only have 1 bid) I'd just call 6♠ and not think it is a "dog" to make.

.. neilkaz ..

Too bad that doing a simulation is so tough..what with trying to program a 3♥ hand in addition to the parameters for the weak two and the 3♠ bid.

I understand the enthusiasm for the hand, but I think that the aggressive bidders are ignoring a couple of points.

1stly, are you really happy to reach slam opposite your five small and a minor suit Q? I wouldn't want to be there opposite xxxxx xxxx QJ QJ, for example. They might lead ♥s and trump might not break 2-2: then where are you?

And are you getting to slam opposite 10xxxx xxxx Qx xx? Really?

So, if you accept that even the 5♥ bid won't always reach a good slam, the question must become a balancing of the extra slams you do reach and make via 4♥ then 5♥, and the chances not only that you are about to trun a plus into a minus but also that the opps may start doubling 5♠ when they won't double 4, A109x of trump is likely to start doubling sooner or later: and it would be extraordinarily naive to think that partner can't have xxxx xxxx xx Jxx as an example.

[neilkaz]

mikeh's point that PD could be busted is valid as not always will the opps bid 4♥.

Perhaps 4♥ to flash a big S/I signal is adequate, but anyhow a direct s/off in 4♠ is really far too wimpy for me. Lets at least bring PD into the picture with 4♥

Nice thread.. neilkaz ..

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Jun 19 2007, 10:11 PM, said:

Too bad that doing a simulation is so tough..what with trying to program a 3♥ hand in addition to the parameters for the weak two and the 3♠ bid.

I understand the enthusiasm for the hand, but I think that the aggressive bidders are ignoring a couple of points.

1stly, are you really happy to reach slam opposite your five small and a minor suit Q? I wouldn't want to be there opposite xxxxx xxxx QJ QJ, for example. They might lead ♥s and trump might not break 2-2: then where are you?

And are you getting to slam opposite 10xxxx xxxx Qx xx? Really?

So, if you accept that even the 5♥ bid won't always reach a good slam, the question must become a balancing of the extra slams you do reach and make via 4♥ then 5♥, and the chances not only that you are about to trun a plus into a minus but also that the opps may start doubling 5♠ when they won't double 4, A109x of trump is likely to start doubling sooner or later: and it would be extraordinarily naive to think that partner can't have xxxx xxxx xx Jxx as an example.

Points not ignored, just given appropriate weight I agree that a sim is pretty useless, mostly because of the 3♥ bid which can be 2, 3, 4 trumps and anywhere from a yarb to nearly a strong notrump (well ok not on this hand).

Worrying about partner lacking the spade ten if he has 5 spades is like not taking a shower because you are worried about slipping on the soap. So ok, it's possible if partner has no ten of trumps to be in a slam that is on a 2-2 break (or singleton ten?) if they lead the suit they know dummy is void in. This is what they call a parlay. You just can't live life worrying that if partner has a 5 card suit it will only be 8 high and on top of that the opponents will defend perfectly and you won't get any break.

I don't think it's consistent to say KQJx - AKxxx AKxx is not good enough to bid this way, but that Txxxx xxxx Qx xx is not good enough to bid a slam opposite a hand that does bid this way. Wouldn't that hand in your mind have to be even better than the example in question? We don't force a partner with potentially nothing who has discouraged at every bid so far to the 5 level every day, so when we do that he starts looking at things like his 5th trump and queen and doubletons and length in our void.

Yeah partner could have 5432 xxx xxx xxx but the right yarbroughs!! also make slam. If ever there was a time to take a chance at all, I like this time.

[Codo]

I see too many hands where 5 Spade is the last makable spot, so I will make on more try with 4 Heart and give up after 4 Spade.

[P_Marlowe]

Most likely I can not resist: 5S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Vilgan]

Guess I'm too young/optimistic, but it seems like partner could have many hands that would decline a 4H slam invite where slam is cold, many more where it has play, and some where we'd be opening ourselves up.

Exclusion seems a bit overly committal, okay now that I know partner has 0 aces.. what do I do now? Even if he has 1.. I can't really blast to 7 even knowing that. So it seems like the 4♥ and then 5♥ approach works best. If they have anything at all they'll go (assuming your not prone to overbidding) and if not, we'll stop in 5♠. Every once in a while.. 5♠ won't make, but there are soooooo many ways slam can make here it seems tragic to stop in 4♠ without even trying.

Eric