[manudude03]

---

IMPs scoring, strong field. Your call?

[MrAce]

5♠

[mr1303]

Awkward. Would 4C be strong or Leaping Michaels?

The problem with 5S is that you *know* you're just going to hear 6C coming back and you aren't any better off. I presume you pass that since bidding 7 is a complete guess.

[wank]

5H then sign off.

[manudude03]

 mr1303, on 2017-June-06, 07:46, said:

Awkward. Would 4C be strong or Leaping Michaels?

The problem with 5S is that you *know* you're just going to hear 6C coming back and you aren't any better off. I presume you pass that since bidding 7 is a complete guess.

4C would be leaping michaels.

[Cyberyeti]

 wank, on 2017-June-06, 08:14, said:

5H then sign off.

Don't like 5♥, as it makes the diamond lead more likely if partner does happen to be missing AK and the honours are split.

What's the diff between 5♠/5N here ?

[The_Badger]

What I wrote (previously) as a reply was total trash! Well done WellSpyder for putting me right. Yes, you never pre-empt a pre-empt! (Not thinking quite right this week as I am moving house with all the stress, etc...)

[WellSpyder]

 The_Badger, on 2017-June-06, 09:56, said:

Pass. You have 8 tricks in ♣ and 2 outside aces between the 2 hands. If partner has any decent values outside the ♣ suit he shouldn't be pre-empting, in my opinion.

Partner isn't pre-empting - oppo did that, and you don't pre-empt against a pre-empt. So he is bidding 5♣ with the hope of making it. That makes pass a non-starter in my mind. But the chances of getting to a grand knowing it will be a good contract seems small, and I wonder whether a simple raise to 6♣ will work out best in practice.

[steve2005]

You like clubs. Your never showing 3 aces at this point unless you have a special agreement, so any 5-level bid is pointless. Decide what level you want to play at and pass or bid it.

[nige1]

 manudude03, on 2017-June-06, 06:59, said:

IMPs scoring, strong field. Your call?

---

I rank

• 5♠ = CUE. Unambiguous show of enthusiasm. Shows defensive values, in case opponents compete.
• 6♣ = NAT. Reasonable gamble.
• Pass = NAT. Be wary of punishing enterprise, especially at favourable vulnerability.
• 5♦/♥ = NAT?CUE? Might be doubled for the lead.
• 7♣ = NAT. Optimistic.

[Winstonm]

5C is a strong bid - most likely 7 clubs in length, so 0337 or 1237 shape. Would in be right to bid 5C directly without the diamond A? -, KQx, KQx, KQJxxxx? That is a 3 Club bid.

I trust partner to have a quite good hand. I bid 7C.

[rmnka447]

6 ♣

I agree 5 ♣ should be strong else partner has preempted a preempt which should be a no-no. But if partner has done that, the onus is om him/her.

With that being said, it's possible that partner has pushed a tad to bid 5 ♣ with a player. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like - x KQJx KQJxxxxx or similar come down. Since there's just no way to know if 13 tricks are there or not, 6 ♣ seems to be the practical bid. If 6 ♣ makes 7, then the opponents still have to bid it.

[Winstonm]

 rmnka447, on 2017-June-06, 12:22, said:

6 ♣

I agree 5 ♣ should be strong else partner has preempted a preempt which should be a no-no. But if partner has done that, the onus is om him/her.

With that being said, it's possible that partner has pushed a tad to bid 5 ♣ with a player. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like - x KQJx KQJxxxxx or similar come down. Since there's just no way to know if 13 tricks are there or not, 6 ♣ seems to be the practical bid. If 6 ♣ makes 7, then the opponents still have to bid it.

From my experience, and please understand that I'm talking years and years ago, of occassionally playing against and more often observing (after having been crushed by) players like Hamman, Wolff, Lair, Soloway, Lawrence, etc., it is that they all had the discipline not to bid 5C without having their bid - so that their partners could confidently bid 7C with this kind of hand.

Your 6C bid exemplifies what I found out and what you would find going back to the other table against someone with that kind of discipline: 6C making 7 is a loss.

[Tramticket]

Is this the hand to psych a 5D cue bid?

[Cyberyeti]

 Winstonm, on 2017-June-06, 11:52, said:

5C is a strong bid - most likely 7 clubs in length, so 0337 or 1237 shape. Would in be right to bid 5C directly without the diamond A? -, KQx, KQx, KQJxxxx? That is a 3 Club bid.

I trust partner to have a quite good hand. I bid 7C.

void, KQJ, Kx or Qx, KQJ 8th or similar is possible, not much defence, plenty of offence, 5♣ should be close, don't know how many spades ops are making, and make them guess.

[MrAce]

 Cyberyeti, on 2017-June-06, 09:43, said:

Don't like 5♥, as it makes the diamond lead more likely if partner does happen to be missing AK and the honours are split.

What's the diff between 5♠/5N here ?

In this auction I expect 5♣ bidder to be void in spades 90% of the time.

5 ♠ allows 5♣ bidder to show some life for grand by bidding 5 NT. 5 NT does not. So imo 5 NT should be more specific, i.e asking to bid 7 with more than 7 trumps or whatever suits your taste. Just an idea, not something I experienced before.

[aguahombre]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-07, 07:33, said:

In this auction I expect 5♣ bidder to be void in spades 90% of the time.

5 ♠ allows 5♣ bidder to show some life for grand by bidding 5 NT. 5 NT does not. So imo 5 NT should be more specific, i.e asking to bid 7 with more than 7 trumps or whatever suits your taste. Just an idea, not something I experienced before.

Agree with 5♠, and the "show some life" thing. We all know the well-worn saying that we don't preempt a preempt; but it isn't that simple in this case. Without Leaping Mike on our card, Partner's 5♣ as opposed to 4♣ would probably be a hand where raising to 6 with my 3 bullets is a reasonable shot and 7 would just be a dream. But, here, Partner could have a hand with the nuts and couldn't bid 4♣ because of system -- or she might not. 5♠ to ask "which is it?" seems about right.

[neilkaz]

 MrAce, on 2017-June-07, 07:33, said:

In this auction I expect 5♣ bidder to be void in spades 90% of the time.

5 ♠ allows 5♣ bidder to show some life for grand by bidding 5 NT. 5 NT does not. So imo 5 NT should be more specific, i.e asking to bid 7 with more than 7 trumps or whatever suits your taste. Just an idea, not something I experienced before.

I agree.

[Winstonm]

 Cyberyeti, on 2017-June-07, 05:57, said:

void, KQJ, Kx or Qx, KQJ 8th or similar is possible, not much defence, plenty of offence, 5♣ should be close, don't know how many spades ops are making, and make them guess.

I don't think so - a jump over a preempt is the best way we have a showing strength. If your partnership wishes to play differently that is certainly fine and may work better. I would argue you can't have it both ways.

My point is that this is a situation where due to bidding room constraints a binary choice is all we have - we can't have Alice-in-Wonderland bidding where a bid means just what I mean it when I bid it. So we have to pick: strong or not?

The really important part IMO is that regardless of how we choose to play the bid, we need to have the discipline to adhere to our choice when it seems a poor bid.

The story of how the Dallas Aces were formed to combat the Italian Blue Team - if you can find the book - had a lot of discussion about just this issue - how the American team had to learn that in a long match or series of matches that overall consistency and discipline were more important than the result on any one hand or bid. The critical issue was team unity.

[Cyberyeti]

 Winstonm, on 2017-June-07, 10:24, said:

I don't think so - a jump over a preempt is the best way we have a showing strength. If your partnership wishes to play differently that is certainly fine and may work better. I would argue you can't have it both ways.

My point is that this is a situation where due to bidding room constraints a binary choice is all we have - we can't have Alice-in-Wonderland bidding where a bid means just what I mean it when I bid it. So we have to pick: strong or not?

The really important part IMO is that regardless of how we choose to play the bid, we need to have the discipline to adhere to our choice when it seems a poor bid.

The story of how the Dallas Aces were formed to combat the Italian Blue Team - if you can find the book - had a lot of discussion about just this issue - how the American team had to learn that in a long match or series of matches that overall consistency and discipline were more important than the result on any one hand or bid. The critical issue was team unity.

It's also what you define as strong, I'm not overcalling 3♣ over 2♠ with 9 or 9.5 tricks (particularly at this vul), so 5♣ seems the only option on the hand I gave.

X then bidding also shows strength and takes care of a lot of the hands with 6 clubs, and some of the ones with 7. 5♣ should have no doubt about strain, and I think will have 8 a goodly amount of the time.