[bluecalm]

Quote

. I would consider to have a real problem if pard dbls.

Seriously ? If partner doubles then it's easy 5♠ his double should be competitive and I see 4trumps support and lack of trump stack.

[rhm]

5♠

Partner said he is not prepared to stop in 3♠ so must be close to a 2♣ opening and this must be FP situation. This also adds up with the fact, that one opponent has passed, another preempted and you yourself are weak.
Since I am not prepared to play 5♦ doubled when partner has shown a long and strong ♠ suit, I bid 5♠ immediately. If you bid 5♠ after partner doubled 5♦ you are inviting 6♠, not that you could not make up your mind what to do on the previous round.

Rainer Herrmann

[ArtK78]

5♠.

This is a forcing pass situation. I cannot be sure whether both sides are making 10 or 11 tricks here, but it is often the case that when both sides have a fit it is right to bid one more, especially at IMPs. The rewards for bidding (making 11 or 12 tricks in spades when opps make 9 to 11 tricks in diamonds) exceeds the risks (both sides make 10 or fewer tricks).

Clearly, I am not strong enough to pass and bid 5♠, and doubling (or passing and passing partner's double) is aiming at too small a target on very limited information.

Quite frankly, I think 5♠ is clear, and the more difficult problem may come on the next round of bidding if there is one.

[gwnn]

ArtK78, on 2011-March-29, 08:55, said:

5♠.
Quite frankly, I think 5♠ is clear, and the more difficult problem may come on the next round of bidding if there is one.

I agree it's clear but will it really be that difficult a problem? Will you be thinking of accepting a slam try?

[bluecalm]

Quote

Partner said he is not prepared to stop in 3♠ so must be close to a 2♣ opening and this must be FP situation.

Except that he could just have 8.5-9 playing tricks and hope for the best knowing we wouldn't raise his 3♠, something like:

KQJ9xxx AQJx x x

Doesn't look like 2♣ opener but is quite possible 4♠ bid.
Now if you want to play a system which require you to remember 100's of situations (would it be forcing if 5♦ bidder isn't passed hand ? would it be forcing if they play 3[diamonds} as "constructive" ?, would it be forcing if both side were nonvul ?) and force you to double them just because you have this 13count and partner have nothing, all in exchange for maybe slightly more accurate bidding, which also makes opponents decisions easier, then good luck to you :-)

Also what exactly partner would double with after your "encouraging" pass ? I mean he jumped to 4♠ when he could've doubled with powerful hand and something like 6-3-1-3. I wonder what kind of hands which were suitable for 4♠ now want to defend after your fp. Won't be easy to make those decisions without very detailed partnership understanding.

[rhm]

bluecalm, on 2011-March-29, 09:25, said:

I mean he jumped to 4♠ when he could've doubled with powerful hand and something like 6-3-1-3.

Most experts play over a preempt that double followed by a 4♠ bid shows a more flexible hand (two places to play etc.) and not a hand stronger than a jump to 4♠.
Both show strong hands

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

bluecalm, on 2011-March-29, 09:25, said:

Now if you want to play a system which require you to remember 100's of situations (would it be forcing if 5♦ bidder isn't passed hand ? would it be forcing if they play 3[diamonds} as "constructive" ?, would it be forcing if both side were nonvul ?)

That appears to be three situations, and they don't require specific agreement - they should all be covered by general rules. In fact, I don't even think we need general rules for these - If we don't have any agreements about these, the answers are no, no, and yes.

Quote

and force you to double them just because you have this 13count and partner have nothing, all in exchange for maybe slightly more accurate bidding, which also makes opponents decisions easier, then good luck to you :-)

Also what exactly partner would double with after your "encouraging" pass ? I mean he jumped to 4♠ when he could've doubled with powerful hand and something like 6-3-1-3. I wonder what kind of hands which were suitable for 4♠ now want to defend after your fp. Won't be easy to make those decisions without very detailed partnership understanding.

Discussing high-level competitive sequences is definitely a good idea, and a better use of a partnership's time than adding twiddly bits to the 1NT structure. However, we can't discuss everything, and if we haven't discussed this sequence we can still use judgement and experience.

I expect he'd double 5♦ on most hands that have a doubleton diamond, and I expect he'd bid 5♠ on most hands that are 7-1 in the pointed suits. If, as you say, he's unlikely to be 6313, that's a good thing - it reduces the number of hands where he'll be unsure what to do after my forcing pass.

[tolvyrj]

I can think many hands where both 4♠ and 5♦ makes . But back into the real world, IMO what ever i do means something, so i must do the least wrong thing here.
I think pass is the strongest bid here, double advocates weak hand with no desire to go further in ♠ and 5♠ denotes weak hand with some support, so thats what im going to bid.
Ok 6♦ or 6♠ r stronger than pass. What will happend next...gee lets hope the guy in the other table is in same place as im .

[jogs]

PASS.

Suspect both 5D and 5S goes down. No singleton is bad for our offense. Two doubletons in the side suits increases the chances of pard also having at least two in each minor. Looks like an unlucky hand for both sides.

[655321]

5♠.

Perhaps 12 tricks are cold - 5 hearts and 7 black suit tricks with only one loser in the minors - even so bidding 5♥ seems like way too much so I just bid the obvious and boring 5♠.

[nige1]

IMO 5♠ = 10, _P = 8, 5♥ = 6, , _X = 4
IMO it 's a guess. If you pass, then you should pass again when partner doubles because pass and pull shows a stronger hand (as I play it). (5♥ didn't occur to me until I read 655321's post).

[Hanoi5]

I choose 5♠. I understand the logic behind passing being forcing (after reading Justin's post) but I don't want to double (or leave it double) so I just bid what i think we make.

[Free]

I don't understand why people think this is a forcing pass situation. I'll just pass.

[peachy]

We are vulnerable against not-vul and bid game, so it is our hand; by the metarules Pass by this hand should then be forcing, but I would not be sure and would not be sure partner would be sure. "If" it is clear, Pass is forcing, then I must bid 5S now rather than later.

[helene_t]

gwnn, on 2011-March-29, 09:00, said:

I agree it's clear but will it really be that difficult a problem? Will you be thinking of accepting a slam try?

If p makes a slam try over my 5♠ I will accept

[aguahombre]

helene_t, on 2011-March-30, 08:44, said:

If p makes a slam try over my 5♠ I will accept

I smiled.

[gwnn]

Well this must be very funny but

3D-4S-5D-5S
6D*-p
*not all opps are completely sane
is indeed a slam try.

[han]

The gwnn strikes back.

[zasanya]

JLOGIC, on 2011-March-28, 15:34, said:

How can this not be a forcing pass situation? RHO is a passed hand, LHO has preempted white/red in third seat, and partner has jumped to game showing a strong hand. The ability to defend 5D undoubled in this scenario does not make logical sense. Yes I'm sure you can come up with some layouts where they are cold and we are down 500, but it is so unlikely I wouldn't even worry about it (and even then, we haven't lost much). On the other side having the ability to make a more informed decision about whether or not to bid 5S over 5D is really useful.

While I think I can can work out what sort of hand should double (Short ♠ with a ♦honor?) I cant figure out what sort of hand should bid 5 spades.( no A K; 3+ spades with short ♣ or ♥? )
Could you help?

[straube]

For what it's worth, Robson/Segal in their book Partnership Bidding would recommend (pretty sure anyway) this to be a forcing pass situation because our side at unfavorable vul jumped to game.