[Fluffy]

---

Match Points

[MrAce]

I'd Pass.
Too bad for us on this board if pd had good 5 card clubs and could not DBL due to it being support dbl.

[helene_t]

Give p hx qxx qxx aqxxx and 5c is on a finesse while 4h makes most of the time. I bid 5c.

[goingoren]

our void suggests partner might have some length in hearts and they are vulnerable. pass and set them.

[Trinidad]

MrAce, on 2015-June-04, 01:30, said:

I'd Pass.
Too bad for us on this board if pd had good 5 card clubs and could not DBL due to it being support dbl.

How many clubs do you think partner has?

He either has a 2=4=3=4 distribution, or he has at least 5 clubs. On the other hand, partner won't have 7 clubs or he would have rebid the clubs. So, I would play partner for a 2=3=3=5 distribution or that distribution with one card moved to another suit (not spades).

I would bid 5♣.

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

Trinidad, on 2015-June-04, 04:39, said:

How many clubs do you think partner has?

Don't know enough about the 1♣ opener to tell, what do they open with 1444/2443/2344 ? Not everybody opens 1♦ on these shapes.

But yes most of the time partner has 5 clubs and this could play for a lot of tricks. I would bid 5♣

[manudude03]

Do we have a 4NT bid available to show a good 5C bid? If so, put me down for 5C, otherwise pass.

[helene_t]

manudude03, on 2015-June-04, 05:30, said:

Do we have a 4NT bid available to show a good 5C bid? If so, put me down for 5C, otherwise pass.

I think partner is almost marked with a balanced 12-14 (maybe short in spades, but even then less than reverse strength) so is this really necesary? OK he could have A-xxxx-AQx-Axxxx I suppose but if he raised to 6♣ with that I am happy.

I think I would rather have 4NT to show diamonds with club tollerance, something like 4153.

[manudude03]

helene_t, on 2015-June-04, 05:35, said:

I think partner is almost marked with a balanced 12-14 (maybe short in spades, but even then less than reverse strength) so is this really necesary? OK he could have A-xxxx-AQx-Axxxx I suppose but if he raised to 6♣ with that I am happy.

I think I would rather have 4NT to show diamonds with club tollerance, something like 4153.

On this hand, I would never be looking for slam, but it would be nice to differentiate this hand and the same hand with the 2 black kings added. It would also help if the opponents were to bid to 5H.

[MrAce]

Deleted

[Fluffy]

manudude03, on 2015-June-04, 06:22, said:

On this hand, I would never be looking for slam, but it would be nice to differentiate this hand and the same hand with the 2 black kings added. It would also help if the opponents were to bid to 5H.

Vulnerability protects you a bit from that in this case.

[mikeh]

East jumped to game opposite what will often be a 3 card raise, with both opps bidding, so I would expect East to hold 6 hearts far more often than 5, so I certainly don't expect partner to have a good defensive trump holding. I think anything but 5♣ is just giving up. That doesn't mean I am certain that bidding 5♣ will work on all layouts consistent with the auction, but it does mean that I think the action is clear.

[helene_t]

mikeh, on 2015-June-04, 09:06, said:

East jumped to game opposite what will often be a 3 card raise, with both opps bidding, so I would expect East to hold 6 hearts far more often than 5, so I certainly don't expect partner to have a good defensive trump holding.

13-6-3=4.

[Phil]

I like 5♣ too, at least at MPs but maybe it's the right call at IMPS too since I think we are -300 vs -620 often enough to make up for the phantoms.

[mikeh]

helene_t, on 2015-June-04, 09:16, said:

13-6-3=4.

arithmetic was never my strong point.

I remain of the view, somewhat chastened, that N won't likely have a good defensive holding, even if he has 4 of them....firstly, they likely won't be a strong internal holding, secondly declarer likely has long enough trump to withstand the tap, especially since there is no reason to place meaningful club length in dummy, and finally the opps may have 10 or more trump......but your main point is well-taken and I will practice addition and subtraction before making similar posts again

[Fluffy]

I bid 5♣ for a cold bottom, partner decided not to support double with a 3334 including ♥KJx. A guess in hearts was required to avoid third down in 4♥ while 5♣ went 2 down quickly.

[mikestar13]

A question: what would 1♠ instead of the negative double have shown? I have had partnerships where X=exactly 4 spades and 1♠=5+ spades--in this case, support doubles should be off, and partner's failure to double 2♣ should indeed tend to deny as much as five good clubs--making a better case for pass as the final call.

[fromageGB]

I am absolutely amazed that so many seem to be wanting to bid 5♣. Seems a clear pass to me. My partner often openes 1♣ on two, and this bidding is certainly consistent with him having some hearts and 4♥ going off.

[helene_t]

fromageGB, on 2015-June-07, 11:11, said:

I am absolutely amazed that so many seem to be wanting to bid 5♣. Seems a clear pass to me. My partner often openes 1♣ on two, and this bidding is certainly consistent with him having some hearts and 4♥ going off.

Yes but if we open 1♦ on balanced hands with four diamonds then his failure to make a support double means that he is either 2434, 2425, 2335, 1435. Maybe 2245 or 1345 (if it is our style to open 1♣ wth those shapes), maybe six clubs (if 3♣ by him would have shown extras and g/b 2nt was not available). So he has five clubs most of the time and certainly not less than four.