[microcap]

Rex and I have been getting along swimmingly lately, so no vicious posts. We did miss a slam last night and would be curious as to your comments.

Scoring: IMP

---

After 2 passes, Rex opened 1♦ which promises at least 4 cards. Annoying RHO preempts 3♠. I muster up a 4♦ bid. Now Rex bids 4♥, meant as a slam exploration. While I like my hand a little better as the auction goes on, it hardly seemed like slam was likely, so I bid 5♦ and Rex passes.

As you can see, 7♦ rolls home quite easily.

Any thoughts?

[pooltuna]

microcap, on May 25 2010, 08:33 AM, said:

Rex and I have been getting along swimmingly lately, so no vicious posts.  We did miss a slam last night and would be curious as to your comments.

Dealer: South Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠   ♥ AK8 ♦ AQ543 ♣ AJ643 ♠ 1095 ♥ Q32 ♦ K8762 ♣ K2

After 2 passes, Rex opened 1♦ which promises at least 4 cards.  Annoying RHO preempts 3♠.  I muster up a 4♦ bid.  Now Rex bids 4♥, meant as a slam exploration.  While I like my hand a little better as the auction goes on, it hardly seemed like slam was likely, so I bid 5♦ and Rex passes.

As you can see, 7♦ rolls home quite easily.

Any thoughts?

North didn't envision South's problem very well he should not give up and either try 6♣ or 5♠. After all North could have held

---

[gwnn]

pretty sure that

*N can't have the hand given by Tuna
*N should learn bridge! partner bid 4d! that's not purely competitive, surely it promises some values!
*N!! please force to slam??? partner bid 4D!! partner can't have much wasted in spades because he would have bid 3N with that.. 6D over 5D at least! but I think a simple 5S exclusion is fine.

[WrecksVee]

FYI my hand was actually ♠void ♥AKx ♦AJTxx ♣AJxxx

I do like the comment that I should have given more weight to Jay's failure to bid 3NT.

[bid_em_up]

[quote name='pooltuna' date='May 25 2010, 09:42 AM']North didn't envision South's problem very well he should not give up and either try 6[cl] or 5[sp]. After all North could have held

♠	Kx
♥	Jxx
♦	K10xxxx
♣	xx

---

Ok, so maybe that's an exaggeration. Still, North has heard the auction and is still making a slam try. South should cooperate and show where his values lie.

It is practically impossible for North to be missing the diamond king and the club king, and has a spade loser and still be making a slam try.

I would assign 100% to South for failing to cooperate, except North could make South's life easier by cuebidding 4[sp] (not 4[he]). This cuebid would show a huge hand (which he has) and practically scream "show me the money!!" to South. South then becomes 100% obligated to show the K[cl].

So......50% to each.

[bid_em_up]

gwnn, on May 25 2010, 11:06 AM, said:

....but I think a simple 5S exclusion is fine.

Just curious. What do you hope to find out by bidding 5♠ exclusion? The only keycard partner can have outside of spades is the K♦ and while it's nice to know partner has it, you've already committed yourself to 6♦ by using it. And by using exclusion, North will not be able to find out about the club king, which is really what he needs to know.

jmoo.

[655321]

microcap, on May 25 2010, 09:33 AM, said:

Rex and I have been getting along swimmingly lately, so no vicious posts.  We did miss a slam last night and would be curious as to your comments.

Um, South raised his partner's suit to the 4 level with a balanced 8 count (well done), North has the world plus a void in the opponent's suit and his partner supported him at the 4 level, yet he stopped in game.

100% to North obviously, what comments do you want to hear?

[gwnn]

bid_em_up, on May 25 2010, 03:31 PM, said:

gwnn, on May 25 2010, 11:06 AM, said:

....but I think a simple 5S exclusion is fine.

Just curious. What do you hope to find out by bidding 5♠ exclusion? The only keycard partner can have outside of spades is the K♦ and while it's nice to know partner has it, you've already committed yourself to 6♦ by using it. And by using exclusion, North will not be able to find out about the club king, which is really what he needs to know.

jmoo.

fair point, that wasnt the most intelligent part of my posting history but that doesnt mean that N should not drive to slam. Anyway some people play 5S as just void showing so then S should bid 6C and then N can bid the grand with reasonable confidence I think (on grounds that S can have x, Kx, KQx etc and at worst Kxx which is grand on a finesse).

[jjbrr]

Yeah N could just bid slam after 4♦. If you have good slam agreements you might get to 7, but it doesn't seem so easy.

[Phil]

655321, on May 25 2010, 10:32 AM, said:

microcap, on May 25 2010, 09:33 AM, said:

Rex and I have been getting along swimmingly lately, so no vicious posts.   We did miss a slam last night and would be curious as to your comments.

Um, South raised his partner's suit to the 4 level with a balanced 8 count (well done), North has the world plus a void in the opponent's suit and his partner supported him at the 4 level, yet he stopped in game.

100% to North obviously, what comments do you want to hear?

Agree with this.

With the North hand after 4♦ I'm more concerned with missing 7 than going down in 6.

[Fluffy]

Rex this time it was your fault dude, construct any decent hand for partner and see how slam must be good.

[pooltuna]

gwnn, on May 25 2010, 10:06 AM, said:

pretty sure that

*N can't have the hand given by Tuna
*N should learn bridge! partner bid 4d! that's not purely competitive, surely it promises some values!
*N!! please force to slam??? partner bid 4D!! partner can't have much wasted in spades because he would have bid 3N with that.. 6D over 5D at least! but I think a simple 5S exclusion is fine.

He could have held it when South bid 4♦ but not after he bid 4♥

[Jlall]

I don't think I woulda bid 4D heh. If I was north and I had one bid for my life over 4D it's close between 6D and 7D.