[ArtK78]

There are now 12 votes for pass and 11 votes for something other than pass.

Counting Justin (who did not vote) there are actually 13 votes for pass.

Clearly, there is a divided opinion on this issue. The issue is not going to be solved here, despite the fact that some of the posters feel very strongly about their choices. Personally, I am very much in favor of passing, but I concede that I will miss some making slams. Some believe the 5 level is safe, but others disagree.

As Justin notes, any simple new suit bid is a cue bid. Whether cue bidding will accomplish what you want to accomplish is debatable.

A number of posters chose 5♥. Some explicitly state that they are looking for a spade control, and that they expect partner to bid 5NT if he holds Kx of spades. Others don't really say much, but it seems that they are looking for a spade control. Apparenly all of the 5♥ bidders expect partner to hold solid or near-solid hearts for the 4♥ bid at unfavorable vul.

In any event, the issue is partly one of style (how good must the heart suit be at this vulnerability). In my opinion, the bidding side can be off two cashing aces - one of which is the trump ace. I gave the example of x KQJT9xxxxx x x as a hand on which all(?) would bid 4♥. If there is someone out there who won't bid 4♥ on that hand, how about x KQJT9xxxxxx x --? The point being that one cannot rely on the heart suit being 7 or 8 solid even at unfavorable vulnerability.

So, take your best shot.

[Phil]

Art, the fact that you have a very divided group means that this is probably a good problem, because it usually means its a close decision. It could also indicate the bidders play a sound preempting style, or that one group is demonstrably more experienced than another.

I didn't express an opinion, and I hope that my comment about 5N isn't construed as such.

If I'm playing with a sound preemptor whom I can count on for a really good suit and some shape - x, AQJTxxxx, void, xxxx or x, AKQJxxx, x, Qxxx, then even though slam isn't cold, its reasonable on the 1st and excellent on the 2nd, then I would be tempted to try, and it might be a SOTM thing.

If I am playing with a knucklehead who doesn't respect colors, then pass is totally obvious.

In the end, I think I'd pass.

[vianu2]

ArtK78, on 2011-August-10, 10:55, said:

I gave the example of x KQJT9xxxxx x x as a hand on which all(?) would bid 4♥. If there is someone out there who won't bid 4♥ on that hand, how about x KQJT9xxxxxx x --? The point being that one cannot rely on the heart suit being 7 or 8 solid even at unfavorable vulnerability.
So, take your best shot.

OK i can see that some of your arguments do have value and i can further amplify that value with some serious revision.

Given that hand, x KQJT9xxxxxx x --.and your 4♥ overcal , i will take a look to the E's hand
x - xxxxxxx xxxxx
opposite to
AKQxxx x - KQxxxx

Or u expect opps to be balanced when u have 11 red cards ?
You may even ruff a spade but is your lead))
Just for fun

[ArtK78]

Phil, there are two ways of looking at the situation.

One is that it is a good problem.

The other is that it is completely unsolvable and comes down to essentially a guess. You have some information - your partner's tendancies on preempts at unfavorable vulnerability being the most relevant item.

In my opinion, this problem comes down to almost a complete guess. Any action other than pass commits you to the 5 level and possibly the 6 level without sufficient information to be reasonably confident about the outcome. And, of course, pass eliminates any possibility of bidding slam which could be cold.

There are two camps of guessers. The first camp votes for Pass because it is too dangerous to try for slam, because slam is unlikely, or because there is no rational way of finding out the information needed to determine whether slam is likely (or a combination of the three), and the second camp bids on to try for slam. Within the latter camp is the discussion of how to best try for slam, which did produce some interesting ideas. I particularly like the comment about getting to 6NT rather than 6♥ when the 4♥ bidder has Kx of spades. One poster noted that this could result in going down 5 in 6NT.

The bottom line is - quoting from South Park - What did we learn here today? We learned that acting over preempts, whether by the opposition or by partner - is filled with uncertainty. This is nothing new. The fact that reasonable posters differ whether to pass or whether to act over partner's 4♥ bid doesn't mean that one side is wrong and the other side is right. Perhaps one side guesses better than the other side.

[Phil]

Art, what makes this an interesting problem (and you don't seem to agree) is that there is a finite set of hands that can make a r/w 4♥ overcall. Partner has the option of bidding 1♥, 3♥, and 4♥. Perhaps you play with a lot of different people that can have a very wide range for 4♥, and if thats the case, its truly a guess. But there's no need to call the situation 'unsolvable', because there are very few situations in bridge that are truly solvable, and some decisions are harder than others.

While we have uncertainty in continuing, the fact that partner's hand falls within a pretty tight range, makes a slam try a lot less speculative. For investigating to be wrong, the following need to occur:

- We make exactly 4♥. Not 5, 6 or 7, but not 3 either (although we'll probably get doubled in 5).
- We can't find out specifically what we need to know to reliably place the contract. Unfortunately partner's bid has robbed of this space. Accordingly, partner's call needs to be well defined.

With partners that I have discussed this with, a r/w 4♥ overcall shows 8.5 - 9 tricks (4 losers generally) and a maximum of one outside defensive trick. All of the following would be eligible:

- void AKQJxxx xx Kxxx
- x AQJxxxxx x Kxx
- Ax AKQTxxxx x xx
- void, KQJxxxx x Qxxxx
- xx, AQJTxxxx, void, Kxx

Slam is good opposite #1 and 3. With 2 its so-so, and with 4 its seriously anti-%. With 5 its unplayable. The 5 level its fine for 4 of these 5 hands, although you'd probably prefer not to be there on 4.

The nice thing is, a 5♣ cue will get us to slam on 1 and 3. Partner will probably counter accept on 2 with 5♦, which is LTTC, and I'd assume we'd retreat to 5♥. These examples also show why a 5♣ cue is far preferable to 4N, or 5♥.

With my partner that plays this style, I think an advance is OK and in my small set you'd gain IMPs, and you might even find the grand on 1. With a random expert, that pays less attention to colors, where a 4 level preempt just expects to deliver a 7-4 or an 8 card suit, I'd pass. But when I pass, I'm not saying, "oh crap, anything could be right, so I will get fixed and blame partner if its wrong", but rather its a more measured,

- "we haven't discussed this, and I've seen r/w 4♥ overcalls hands that make slam, and hands that take 10 tricks opposite a moose like this". Or,

- "I KNOW this person premmpts loosely, I hope I have enough"

but it is never 'unsolvable'.

[JLOGIC]

Phil, on 2011-August-10, 14:26, said:

While we have uncertainty in continuing, the fact that partner's hand falls within a pretty tight range, makes a slam try a lot less speculative. For investigating to be wrong, the following need to occur:

- We make exactly 4♥. Not 5, 6 or 7, but not 3 either (although we'll probably get doubled in 5).

If only this were true, bridge would be so easy

[JLOGIC]

Random thought of the day: Bidding something like 5N might be good against the right RHO, they probably won't lead a spade? But RHO will be short enough in spades that that is unlikely to work... if your partner doesn't have AKQ of hearts and bid 7 then RHO will think their best shot of beating 6 is to get a heart trick and a 2nd round spade trick. This would be a better bid if you had shortish spades since RHO would probably have some length and think a spade is futile.

[jdeegan]

Lots of good comments. Thanks. I think my point is that bidding is conversational. Particularly on preemptive hands, the question is often necessarily ambiguous. In this case it's both ♠ control AND ♥ suit quality. There are no rules, per se, but you should be able to look at your hand and know what to do. You know you have enough tricks on this hand. The question is whether you have two losers. There is a clear negative inference in that you didn't make some other slam try bid.

[whereagles]

Even if you play 1♠-3♠ as any AKQxxxx and out, pard might have preferred to bid 4♥ with that suit if he has a spade singleton/void.

But it's a bit of a guess. Bid 5/6♥ if you feel lucky. Else just pass.