[Cascade]

Favourable Vul

2♥* (2♠) 3♥ (3♠)
4♦

Edit
===
* Standard weak two - sorry the asterisk got there by mistake

[ArtK78]

2♥ is noted with an asterisk, but there is no explanation.

I assume that the 2♥ bid is not a normal standard weak 2 bid, otherwise the 4♦ bid is extremely unusual (one might even say impossible).

Please explain.

[paulg]

ArtK78, on Jan 26 2008, 09:23 PM, said:

... otherwise the 4♦ bid is extremely unusual (one might even say impossible).

I expect that is the point of the question.

I voted for lead based on shortage, which I know will not be popular. But I would not open a 6-5 or 5-5 hand with 2♥ at this vul, and any 6-4 that is worth bidding 4♦ would be opened 3♥ or higher.

Paul

[jdonn]

I voted 6-5. I think 6-4 might barely be possible but it's clearly an exception, and that really you would want 6-5 to bid again in front of partner here.

[skjaeran]

I can't imaging perpetrating that sequence.

Neither lead directing nor natural seems possible to me.

I'd never introduce a 4 card suit here and I don't think I'll ever open a 6-5 weak 2. If I wanted to open such a hand it would be at the 1- or 3-level.

[han]

This is uncommon but not unusual for me, it shows a second suit, usually 6-5.

[jdonn]

skaeran, on Jan 26 2008, 05:35 PM, said:

I can't imaging perpetrating that sequence.

Neither lead directing nor natural seems possible to me.

I'd never introduce a 4 card suit here and I don't think I'll ever open a 6-5 weak 2. If I wanted to open such a hand it would be at the 1- or 3-level.

He isn't asking if you would do it, he is asking what you would think it means if a random partner does it After all if partner did that you wouldn't say "I would never do this!" and then leave the table, I hope

[pclayton]

I can't imagine this promising a 6-5. The frequency would not warrant it.

I've become a big advocate of taking another call after a preempt, if the auction warrants it. I'd be happy to do it with a 2nd four card suit, but the quality better be good enough to help partner judge whether to sac or x 4♠.

By the way, I watched the team game on VG when this came up Wayne. It's always fun watching one of our regulars

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Jan 26 2008, 11:42 PM, said:

skaeran, on Jan 26 2008, 05:35 PM, said:

I can't imaging perpetrating that sequence.

Neither lead directing nor natural seems possible to me.

I'd never introduce a 4 card suit here and I don't think I'll ever open a 6-5 weak 2. If I wanted to open such a hand it would be at the 1- or 3-level.

He isn't asking if you would do it, he is asking what you would think it means if a random partner does it After all if partner did that you wouldn't say "I would never do this!" and then leave the table, I hope

Fair enough. No random partner ever did this to me, nor do I expect any to do it either. Nevertheless, if that should indeed happen I'd expect it to be natural, and most probably 6-5.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Jan 26 2008, 03:05 PM, said:

pclayton, on Jan 26 2008, 05:58 PM, said:

I can't imagine this promising a 6-5. The frequency would not warrant it.

Yes but bidding 4D after opening 2H when partner didn't invite is not supposed to be a high frequency action to begin with.

Agree.

[rogerclee]

Regardless of what is best, I would think without discussion, a general principle of "if it is weird and reasonable that this could be natural, then it is natural" applies. So I imagine it's a real diamond suit. Having only 4 diamonds would be pretty crazy IMO, so I would say 5+.

[helene_t]

Must have extra distribution, zero defense, and chunky diamonds. Something like void-QJxxxx-QJxxx-xx.

[whereagles]

There's a strong lead-directing overtone to it, since pard will be on lead. ♦KQx or AQx or maybe a void!

Would definitely be a suit if opener were to be on lead.

[ArtK78]

I see that the asterisk has now been explained, and that it was a stray mark. So the 2♥ call was a standard weak 2 bid.

In this context, I agree that if the 4♦ bid were made that I would interpret it as natural - 6-5 or better.

[Cascade]

pclayton, on Jan 27 2008, 11:58 AM, said:

I can't imagine this promising a 6-5. The frequency would not warrant it.

I've become a big advocate of taking another call after a preempt, if the auction warrants it. I'd be happy to do it with a 2nd four card suit, but the quality better be good enough to help partner judge whether to sac or x 4♠.

By the way, I watched the team game on VG when this came up Wayne. It's always fun watching one of our regulars

Oh S*&^!!!

It wasn't our finest hour although I don't think i did anything too terrible. Partner could have defended a little better a couple of times etc etc

I was improvising here...

I wasn't that excited about my partner's 5♦ raise with ♦J10xx especially if he couldn't really be sure that I was showing five (and as you know I was not).

[dake50]

What, what, what? ?
Does partner's 3H take captaincy of this auction, OR NOT?
What possible 'mastermind' could I have that is so-o-o left field that I can't trust partner's likely next decision? ? ? Or overrule after his decision? ?

[pclayton]

dake50, on Jan 27 2008, 07:08 AM, said:

What, what, what? ?
Does partner's 3H take captaincy of this auction, OR NOT?
What possible 'mastermind' could I have that is so-o-o left field that I can't trust partner's likely next decision? ? ? Or overrule after his decision? ?

No 3♥ doesn't create captaincy, although as many of us have stated, the preemptor usually doesn't take another call.

[cherdano]

dake50, on Jan 27 2008, 09:08 AM, said:

What, what, what? ?
Does partner's 3H take captaincy of this auction, OR NOT?
What possible 'mastermind' could I have that is so-o-o left field that I can't trust partner's likely next decision? ? ? Or overrule after his decision? ?

How about a 6-5 that has a lot more playing strength than a typical weak 2, and that you opened 2♥ planning to show your second suit all along?