[ahydra]

IMPs, 24-board match vs reasonable-standard opps. Opps are vul, you're not.

---

ahydra

[whereagles]

Pard probably has some spades and didn't double. We got a little extra offense, so yes, save.


4NT, showing minors with some heart tolerance. Hopefully pard will get the message

[mikeh]

whereagles, on 2014-December-09, 09:02, said:

Pard probably has some spades and didn't double. We got a little extra offense, so yes, save.


4NT, showing minors with some heart tolerance. Hopefully pard will get the message

if we save, and that is a big 'if', as I will come to, 4N shows longer diamonds than clubs and would not, in any method with which I am familiar, say anything about hearts. Classically, 4N would show a 2 card discrepancy....say 7=5, a holding with which we would certainly be strongly considering a 5 level contract. Given the auction, I'd maybe allow for 6=5, but always longer diamonds.

I don't know of any way of involving hearts.

However, saving is an interesting notion given that we can expect S to hold hearts and clubs as well as a big hand with spades...he did, after all, make a takeout double of diamonds.

My guess is that the save works here, since I suspect that this is the reason the problem was posted, but I think the save to be a bad call. If we wanted to do it, we have to bid 5♣.

[ggwhiz]

If the dive works it's too often petty cash (500 against 620) and a much larger loss when the bad breaks beat 4♠. Why should their suits split badly but ours don't? Partners 1♥ bid could be short diamonds and a piece of cheese.

[whereagles]

mikeh, on 2014-December-09, 09:47, said:

4N shows longer diamonds than clubs and would not, in any method with which I am familiar, say anything about hearts.

That's how I used to play it as well. Mentioned it as possibly hearts because I don't know what's standard around here.

Still, wouldn't ou consider it with a very offensive 6-4, say: void JTx KQJT9x AQJx? (hypothetical hand, of c.)

[ahydra]

I had this hand and opted to take the sac by bidding 4NT. Partner removed to 5H with Jxxx A109xxx Jx x or similar, and went two off doubled. Unfortunately it wasn't the bad splits that made this a bad choice - diamonds 3-3 meant 4S was off one (I think the doubler had a big 4333 hand)

At the other table team-mates misplayed 4SX to go three (!) off for 13 imps out.

I must admit I thought the sac was pretty safe here. I've only got 1.5 defensive tricks, it's unlikely partner will come up with 2.5 more, and he hasn't doubled so it sounds like a good 9- or 10-card fit for opps. However on reflection I think mikeh and ggwhiz are right - it's too risky, even at this vul, when LHO has big strength in clubs and partner almost certainly doesn't have a diamond fit.

ahydra