[mikeh]

---

You are a multiple national champion, playing with a regular partner (me, as it happens) and now you wish you’d opened...something! But you judged this wrong for any heart bid, and you don’t have two-suited openings available

Your call? And why?

[pilowsky]

Redouble - showing hearts and spades.
Also, partner is a great player so If he wants to play it then it would be better in his hands.

[DavidKok]

So uh, 5♥ or 6♦ (unless you have special agreements about 5NT followed by 6♥). On the one hand it seems you are being stolen from, if West jumped with a strong hand it is still unlikely 6M will go down more than two or three (for a relatively small IMP loss compared to the sacrifice in 5M), so instead I would focus on the possibility that West is weak. This means partner has one of those "17+ points, too strong for a direct overcall" hands, with presumably not many wasted values in diamonds if balanced (because then 3NT was available, partner also knows Hamman's rule). The bidding also suggests that partner has 2, maybe 3, diamonds so this looks good.

Perhaps some would argue that 5♥ allows partner to bid again with a very strong hand, and in particular can bid 6♣ with a long club rock-crusher. This seems like something of a mixed bag to me - partner should be able to work out that you're bidding somewhat on their values since you passed first round, so the barrier for bidding again is really high. And it's not clear to me that you want to pass 6♣. Actually, what do you bid if it goes 5♥-(P)-6♣-(P)-? Repeating the hearts seems nonsense, but reversing into 6♠ is also not possible. Maybe 6♦ is pick-a-major, instead of choice between 6♥ and 7♣? But did your hand improve compared to the first round now that you know partner has clubs?

Coming back to the original question, I still have no idea. I was taught that on preemptive auctions the primary concern is to get to the right strain, and secondly to get to the right level, and thirdly that most people err on the side of "one too high" when investigating the second. Unfortunately the first step suggests 6♦ to show both majors, which blows the second right out of the water. At the table I'd close my eyes and gamble 6♦, preparing an apology if 5M is the limit of the hand.

[sfi]

I've got some values, first round control of diamonds and both majors. I'll try 6D. This all presumes 5NT is some pick a slam auction, so I can kind of show the same thing without first round control.

Why? Because now I can blame you if it all goes wrong.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

5NT, intending to correct 6C to 6H should show longer hearts,
If I have doubt, that partner gets the message, than 6D.
5H is the obvious alternative.

I am not sure, I am forcing to the 6 level, if my money is at stake.
It depends on my confidence level at the moment, how the last
boards / session went. Maybe also how understanding my partner is.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I would also have passed as dealer, and regret it, but I pass again
if given the same hand.

PSS: Do you know the EW pair? Espesially W?

[Cyberyeti]

pilowsky, on 2020-September-28, 00:54, said:

Redouble - showing hearts and spades.
Also, partner is a great player so If he wants to play it then it would be better in his hands.

Suggest you recheck the auction, you can't redouble something that hasn't been doubled

Also Mike is also a great player.

[DavidKok]

sfi suggests 5NT and then pulling 6♣ to 6♥ shows both majors and denies a first-round diamond control, and 6♦ promises it instead.
P_Marlowe says this sequence shows longer hearts than spades, and by implication 6♦ presumably denies longer hearts than spades (or is this 5NT into 6♦?). There is no room left to show anything about diamond control.
Personally I play that 5NT into 6♥ would be a "strong raise to 6♥", showing first round diamond control. Partner can bail with 6♠, but may also raise to 7♥. By contrast, bidding 6♥ immediately asks partner to please pass unless they can count 13 tricks (and 5♥ is just 'to play'). Almost the opposite of sfi's suggestion.

I am not aware of any expert standard treatment on sequences like this, but I bet everybody has the perfect one for just this hand (and not other hands that might potentially come up). This is why I suggested 6♦ instead - 5NT is only appropriate if you have a solid agreement on what it means.

[pilowsky]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-September-28, 04:09, said:

Suggest you recheck the auction, you can't redouble something that hasn't been doubled

Also Mike is also a great player.

correct - I meant double again not redouble. And yes, Mike is a great player that's exactly what I meant.

[DavidKok]

Most pairs would play double as some variation of "please stop bidding my hand is boring but we can set them here", instead of both major suits and a void.

[Cyberyeti]

sfi, on 2020-September-28, 02:10, said:

I've got some values, first round control of diamonds and both majors. I'll try 6D. This all presumes 5NT is some pick a slam auction, so I can kind of show the same thing without first round control.

Why? Because now I can blame you if it all goes wrong.

You have 3 ways of showing majors here.

6♦
5N then 6♥ over 6♣
5N then 6♦ over 6♣

I'm not clear what the difference between these is.

[FelicityR]

It's strange everyone seems to be angling towards a slam but there's no guarantee slam could be made. It's difficult to tell whether West is weak or semi-strong here with cards over South the doubler. Partner could have two aces but slam just doesn't happen. I would like a Double of 5♦ to be responsive here, but it isn't, well not in my book.

Sadly, mundanely, boringly, even though it is a good(ish) 6-5 I opt for 5♥ only. That decision might be different knowing the state of the match, but Felicity isn't in a positive mood this morning

[shyams]

I don't know why others are stretching so hard for a slam. I choose to bid 5♥ and I am happy to play there opposite a great hand.

The way I see it, North needs to hold ♠A + ♠K + ♥K or Q + ♣A or ♣KQ to make a slam a great proposition. There may be other hands that make slam but likewise there will be many where slam is poor.

So I am happy to play in 5♥

[paulg]

I've spent so long thinking about this I now think that hitting the Report button for wasting my time is probably the answer.

At the table I know I'd bid six diamonds as I'd struggle to make a non-forcing bid in adequate tempo. Fortunately mikeh is not the sort of person to make a light takeout double opposite a passed hand so I have more confidence of finding a making spot than opposite one of my juniors.

There were many other aspects of this problem to consider, many of which have been described by others. Like who do you want on lead?

[nullve]

P/X: un-Law-ful calls
5♥: Law-ful (even without the double fit)
5♠: Law-ful (because of the double fit)
5N+: overbids

My call: 5♠. (DD probably about as good as 5♥. But will RHO believe I have suppressed a 6c heart suit when LHO leads his singleton heart? )

[Cyberyeti]

shyams, on 2020-September-28, 05:25, said:

I don't know why others are stretching so hard for a slam. I choose to bid 5♥ and I am happy to play there opposite a great hand.

The way I see it, North needs to hold ♠A + ♠K + ♥K or Q + ♣A or ♣KQ to make a slam a great proposition. There may be other hands that make slam but likewise there will be many where slam is poor.

So I am happy to play in 5♥

Reasonable assessment, but I expect to be taking money out of 7♦ a fair amount of the time whether it's making or not.

[mikeh]

Thanks for the replies

As at least one poster commented, I’m not a hyper-aggressive doubler. On this hand, I was under some pressure. I held Axx KQxxx x Axxx.

Passing seemed too dangerous....we could easily have game in either major, or even clubs. Bidding 3H on a short, spotless suit, seemed too committal. Thus double: not a call I liked, but a call I disliked least of the various alternatives

As you can see, slam has no play with my holding this hand. Make it AKxx Kxxx x Axxx, certainly a reasonable double, and slam is a slight favourite to make, and of course I could have other, even better, hands for this double.

As it is, 5H works....the spade King is, as one would expect more often than not, onside, so you lose two black tricks.

My partner chose 6D, leading to a failing 6H.

I like 6D. If, as is likely, I held 2 diamonds, I’ll have a better hand than I did. At least, with Axx KQxxx xx Axx I think passing 3D is the percentage action in a style in which we open virtually all 11 counts. We’re unlikely to have a game, and sometimes, if we do, he will be able to reopen. Meanwhile, doubling with 3523 is less attractive than with the actual 3514, and bidding at all could leave us guessing how big the number will be if LHO, an unpassed hand, doubles 3H or redoubles the double.

One interesting wrinkle, which was irrelevant on the hand, is that opposite 4=4=2=3 in my hand, we often want to be in spades.

Give me AKxx KQxx xx Axx we make grand in spades, barring horrendous splits, but no more than small slam in hearts. Other layouts have 6S making when 6H fails.

However, I think that bidding spades here is at least counter-intuitive. Plus if I am doubling on a chunky 3325, say AKx KQx xx KQxxx we want to be in hearts, not spades.

As for 5H or committing to slam, I think it’s very close. You’re be worried about dummy (if you bid 5H) or partner’s hand (if you force to slam)

As for 5N or 6D, I think 6D is clearly correct. Now, since you are a passed hand, maybe driving to slam should promise first round diamond control, but I think that’s a very specific agreement to have. If one were unpassed, then 5N followed by correcting 6C to 6H could be, say, KQxxx AJxxx xx x, since on this auction partner is known to have a stiff or void diamond.

While 6D would be something like (for an unpassed hand) KQxxx AJxxx void Qxx.

[DavidKok]

And 5NT, correcting 6♣ to 6♦?

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2020-September-28, 15:12, said:

And 5NT, correcting 6♣ to 6♦?

I think that just causes confusion. Put it another way: I was playing with one of the best players in Canada, and we have a fair number of agreements, in a reasonably complex system, yet have not discussed this sequence. Nor will we, since it will likely be another 50 years before it happens again. Neither of us rate to be alive then and, if we are, we won’t remember the agreement😃

[FelicityR]

mikeh, on 2020-September-28, 12:56, said:

Thanks for the replies

As it is, 5H works....the spade King is, as one would expect more often than not, onside, so you lose two black tricks.

Interesting hand, Mike. I, too, thought it close but reasoned that any plus score at teams is better than a minus score. Is that a good way to look at things, too? I was brought up with that maxim that you never quite know what might happen at the other table so bringing a plus score to your colleagues after a series of boards in a match is better than any negative score.

I know that hands like this can turn matches, and you only need a couple to go against you to go from a winning position to one where where you either lose or trail. That's why I replied saying 'that the state of the match' is a major consideration here. Or, how you perceive the match is going influences your decision.

Also, the opponents may well sacrifice to 6♦ here which complicates things further whatever bid you make below that. That opens up other questions about what you partner and you do next? It also gives partner an opportunity to use a forcing pass in competition. Would I be right in saying that partner (South) would 'double' with a poorer hand, but would 'pass' with a better one? Or is it better for partner to bid one more with a better one?

Ah bridge...still as complicated and intriguing as ever

[mikeh]

FelicityR, on 2020-September-28, 22:48, said:

Interesting hand, Mike. I, too, thought it close but reasoned that any plus score at teams is better than a minus score. Is that a good way to look at things, too? I was brought up with that maxim that you never quite know what might happen at the other table so bringing a plus score to your colleagues after a series of boards in a match is better than any negative score.

I know that hands like this can turn matches, and you only need a couple to go against you to go from a winning position to one where where you either lose or trail. That's why I replied saying 'that the state of the match' is a major consideration here. Or, how you perceive the match is going influences your decision.

Also, the opponents may well sacrifice to 6♦ here which complicates things further whatever bid you make below that. That opens up other questions about what you partner and you do next? It also gives partner an opportunity to use a forcing pass in competition. Would I be right in saying that partner (South) would 'double' with a poorer hand, but would 'pass' with a better one? Or is it better for partner to bid one more with a better one?

Ah bridge...still as complicated and intriguing as ever

Good players will almost never bid 6D over 5H. They’ve made us guess last: which is a critical part of preemptive bidding.

Say it goes 5H p p 6D, and we were, as is the case here, close to driving to slam, but chose to go conservative. Now we’ve suddenly got two more descriptive calls, to which we were not entitled. We double when we have no slam interest and we pass when we do.

Say partner held AJxx Kxxx x AKxx. He’d be hard pressed to bid 6H over 5, since the 5H bidder might be stretching. However, after a forcing pass, it’s easy to bid slam.

And opener should be shot if he (in this case, she) bid over 5H, for much the same reason.