[wank]

---

imps

[helene_t]

4♥ sigh.

[eagles123]

I think we too good to bid 4H

I think I would just temporize with 4d

we haven't bid leaping mike so maybe 4d is just a general force rather than a genuine suit?

interesting problem anyway

[mike777]

nonexpert answer here. 4H, I don't think we could have a much worse hand or suit so I want to make the smallest encouragement.

[billw55]

Bidding 3♥ vul has already shown a pretty decent hand. Maybe not quite as good as we have, what with the ♣K now flexing its muscle ... but not enough to get frisky either. 4♥ for me.

[gszes]

We have no clue how strong partner is BUT the one thing we know for sure they did NOT bid 3s. That means there is a pretty darn good chance they may be interested in slam but they cannot proceed logically w/o a spade control. The 4d bid not only shows a dia control but ALSO shows a spade control (does not promise first round). Imagine poor p with xxx Kxxx AQJ AQJ what are they to do over 3h? If we fail to cooperate we might easily miss a grand slam because we failed to heed the probably important message of no spade control. While p will rarely have that magical combination there are still plenty of small slam chances and if p is at all interested in slam the 5 level is almost assuredly safe (something p probably does not know).

[masse24]

helene_t, on 2015-April-02, 13:47, said:

4♥ sigh.

----"sigh" about sums it up.

[helene_t]

eagles123, on 2015-April-02, 13:56, said:

I think we too good to bid 4H

I think I would just temporize with 4d

we haven't bid leaping mike so maybe 4d is just a general force rather than a genuine suit?

interesting problem anyway

You could have a hand too weak for LM or you could have just four diamonds.

OTOH partner should understand that you are under pressure and don't want to bid 6♥ on just about any 6-card suit (let alone 5-card suit) but also don't want to bypass 4♥.

I agree that the hand is a bit strong for 4♥ and maybe 4♦ is the best bid. I don't think it shows extras, though.

[mike777]

I don't see how shifting suits does not always promise extras here, very often much extra.

In any case I thought this hand at this point in the bidding fits very well into the definition of minimum hand for my bids.

[PhilKing]

I have four big cards, maybe five. I'm just going to go for all the marbles here. 5NT - pick a slam.

4♦ is a decent shot as well, since it might help get us to the 4-3 fit.

[nige1]

wank, on 2015-April-02, 13:41, said:

imps

---

IMO 4♠ = 10, 4♥ = 9, 5N = 8, 4♦ = 7, 4N = 6.

[Aardv]

What's the standard meaning of this 4♣? Several of the comments imply that it's a cue for hearts, but I think it's natural. (I'm not saying that's best, I'm saying that's what I'd expect from an expert I'd never discussed it with.)

In that case, 4♥ now means we want to play there, and 4♦ means we're in doubt about level or strain. So 4♦ it is.

[helene_t]

Yes it is natural.

[dboxley]

gszes, on 2015-April-02, 15:03, said:

We have no clue how strong partner is BUT the one thing we know for sure they did NOT bid 3s. That means there is a pretty darn good chance they may be interested in slam but they cannot proceed logically w/o a spade control. The 4d bid not only shows a dia control but ALSO shows a spade control (does not promise first round). Imagine poor p with xxx Kxxx AQJ AQJ what are they to do over 3h?

How about 5H?

[Poky]

5♣

Bidding the only game I think I can make. I don't want to play 4♥ with a singleton across and ♣K is a big card in this spot.

Going for slam with 3 cards in spades and a singleton in clubs is obviously very bad.

[wank]

partner had a toke with his 4c bid (a 6 count) so results are meaningless. fwiw i bid 4d, partner bid 5c and i raised to 6. should be -3.

[gszes]

dboxley, on 2015-April-06, 07:42, said:

How about 5H?

Which becomes quite bad if we have xxx in spades also:)