[jillybean]

---

[TylerE]

At teams (and probably at MP), 4♥. Don't think it's especially close, either.

[mw64ahw]

I get to 4♥ unless North has opened light

[DavidKok]

4♥. Also I think you're safe opposite a light opening - their 4♠ may very well make. At any rate second seat all vulnerable is not the position to get crazy, so it seems reasonable to expect partner to have a normal opening (for your partnership).

[mikeh]

This seems far too good for 4H.

I’m tempted to splinter, but partner won’t be bidding beyond 4H much of the time even when slam is good, because he has no cuebid to express interest...any cue takes us beyond game. Plus I don’t want to let LHO double to suggest a save (or unlikely make) in 5D.

So I’ll content myself with a limit raise, then bid game opposite a rejection.

If it goes 2N (4S) P (P), I’ll trot out 5C, expecting a stiff spade over there most of the time. If he has x AKxxx Axxx Qxx we may reach the excellent slam.

[jillybean]

---

I thought I was in good company with 4♥. Now I think we are in a forcing pass situation here.

[TylerE]

100% *not* a FP. 4♥ does not promise strength. It isn't a voluntary GF.


4♥ can easily be a hand like xx Qxxxxx Qxxx x

[smerriman]

mikeh, on 2021-May-26, 16:43, said:

This seems far too good for 4H.

So I’ll content myself with a limit raise, then bid game opposite a rejection.

Side point - what would you bid if there were no double, and you played 3♥ as a limit raise?

[mikeh]

In answering the OP, I refrained, for once, from describing a method I (and many others) employ. We use 3N, after a double or a pass by RHO, to show a hand with 4+ trump, a stiff somewhere, too good for 4H but not good enough for a splinter, so I’d bid 3N in real life, in either of my serious partnerships.

This thread raises an interesting question, which I shall try to remember to discuss with my partners.

To us, a jump to 4H definitely does not create a forcing pass. 4H hopes to make but certainly doesn’t show ownership of the hand. Neither does a limit raise, for us. A limit raise creates a force to as high as 3H here (3S if we were bidding spades).

3N is sort of in between. We have higher expectations of making game than we’d have for 4H, and I’ve bid slams off of it...opener asks for shortness via 4C, with step responses (opener has to be careful that he can handle an inconvenient response) or via keycard, cuebidding or simply jumping. We always have a decent side suit. We’re usually 5431, but that’s simply the most common shape given the constraints

Returning to the thread, if forced to fill in for someone who bid 4H, I’d now double with someone I trust. This can’t be a pure penalty double....the 5D bidder has at least five diamonds and usually 6.

He can’t have 4 spades, else he’d bid 4S. About the only exception I can think of is extreme shape, say 4=6 with weak spades or 4=7.

He can’t be 5-4 minors, else he’d bid 4N, two places to play

So the most balanced he will be is 3=2=5=3, and I’d expect 6 diamonds more often than 5.

Partner knows this as well, if paying attention, so unless doubler has a very unusual double,I can’t have a diamond stack. Also, he knows I’m not forced to bid here.

So I must have unexpected values somewhere: values that I think may be useful whatever he decides to do. He’ll usually pass, and we rate to go plus, while if he bids, we probably have a chance to make.

Anyway, I had expectations of making, and now they’ve bid 5D my expectations that we could make 4H have improved, so I can’t let them play undoubled. Note that partner has zero reason to think that we had any expectation of making. Our double should say otherwise

I considered breaking a basic rule and bidding 5H myself, but that is very wrong in principle. Give partner something like Kxx AKxxx xx Qxx and we could lose the first 5 tricks, doubled, while nipping 5D one trick.

[apollo1201]

Late in the thread.

I can’t splinter after X (this would be a minimum splinter in an unopposed situation), but I’d like to think I could bid 3C as a fit jump in tempo. OK, it is 54 the other way round usually (I use 4m for 55/46), but the AK are better when the suit is short.

At least, partner can do sth intelligent if it goes 4S after me. And probably do sth more intelligent knowing I have a presentable C suit rather than a D stiff.

Otherwise, 2NT limit raise would do the job (planning to bid 4H no matter what). I like Mikeh 3NT convention.

As it is, after the preemptive jump to 4H, Xing now will show unexpected defensive values and partner will hopefully know what to do with this.

[LBengtsson]

against non expert opposition I would be naughty boy and psyche 1♠ or 2♦ as long as partner knew it was forcing after opps. X

[Cyberyeti]

LBengtsson, on 2021-May-27, 08:25, said:

against non expert opposition I would be naughty boy and psyche 1♠ or 2♦ as long as partner knew it was forcing after opps. X

Something I've not done for a while is the psychic 2♠ fit jump, if I didn't know opps were going to bid diamonds, that would be in the frame too, even if they X for pens and find the spades, you could find partner scoring an unexpected short honour.

[jillybean]

---

I broke a basic bidding rule , please explain again what that is, not trusting partner? This was not a good night.

6/12 teams played in 4♥ -1 , 2 teams played in 4♥= after a ♦A lead.
Twice West was allowed to play in 3♦= and it was played once in 3ntE - 1

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-May-27, 13:00, said:

---

I broke a basic bidding rule , please explain again what that is, not trusting partner? This was not a good night.

6/12 teams played in 4♥ -1 , 2 teams played in 4♥= after a ♦A lead.
Twice West was allowed to play in 3♦= and it was played once in 3ntE - 1

4H was a preempt. I wouldn’t do it because the hand is too good, which is, I suspect, why you felt impelled to bid 5H.

One lesson I’ve learned, the hard way, over.the years is that you stay with the horse you rode in on.

When you bid 4H, you decided this was a preemptive raise. Then despite or because of holding two likely defensive tricks and opposite an opening bid, you decided either that 5H had play and/or that 5H would be a good save against 5D.

If you felt 5H had play, that suggests you shouldn’t have bid 4H: the hand’s too strong. If you felt that 5D was making, I suggest that you haven’t listened to the auction. LHO is almost certainly not very short in clubs. Yes, he might be 3=2=7=1, but the smart money is heavily against that, and even then partner might hold two tricks.

By preempting, you largely deprived partner of any participation in the auction. He could be looking at say xxx KQJxx AKx xx and can’t double after your 4H bid, since you may deliver zero defence.

So stay with your initial decision: that this as a preempt.

Sometimes a mis-evaluation leads to a poor result that ‘could’ have been avoided by reconsidering. And, of course, the auction can sometimes take a weird turn such that you have to re-evaluate. But their bidding game over 4H and partner passing is hardly an unforeseeable development as of your first turn to bid. Most of the time, when you try to change horses mid-stream, you fall off...and the result is rarely pretty.

Once you’ve preempted, you’re done. There are rare exceptions

Say the bidding goes (1S) and you choose 4H on void AKQJxxx AQx KQx

I’m not suggesting you do, but let’s say that was your choice. Now, when LHO bids 4S, passed back to you, you double. This says you bid 4H to make and, critically, that you have good side values. This isn’t a great example of the principle but I’m not trying to say how one bids these hands: merely illustrating the sort of rare time one ‘preempts’ and bids again.

Partner can convert or bid, as he or she sees fit

[jillybean]

Thanks, I didn't consider 4♥ to be a preempt, but I do see that it is exactly that and this misstep led me to bid 5♥. Deja Vu
I need to reevaluate this hand and reconsider how I bid 1M - 4M "I hope you make this" and 1M - 4M "We are making this" so as to include my partner in the final decision.

As with much of your system, I like the 3nt treatment above but I cannot change anything on my card so I will have to file it away and hope I get a chance to use it in the future.

[Winstonm]

jillybean, on 2021-May-27, 13:58, said:

Thanks, I didn't consider 4♥ to be a preempt, but I do see that it is exactly that and this misstep led me to bid 5♥. Deja Vu
I need to reevaluate this hand and reconsider how I bid 1M - 4M "I hope you make this" and 1M - 4M "We are making this" so as to include my partner in the final decision.
As with much of your system, I like the 3nt treatment above but I cannot change anything on my card so I will have to file it away and hope I get a chance to use it in the future.

K, if you can’t change your card you might want to at least talk to your partner about expanding slightly your range for limit raises after a double?

[jillybean]

Winstonm, on 2021-May-27, 16:43, said:

K, if you can’t change your card you might want to at least talk to your partner about expanding slightly your range for limit raises after a double?

Yes, that would be great however my partner has progressing dementia which is going to see our CC shrink, not grow.

[jillybean]

---

I still have a chance to go wrong.
Lacking other agreements, 3♣ limit raise, intending to bid 4♥.
Now I have given partner enough information for him to make a penalty double.
I have extra heart length, shortness in diamonds and ♣AK. ♠984 are awful and East's known spade holding is sitting over declarer.
With ♠ control would I pull the X to 5♥?

[Winstonm]

No. To override the double would require exceptional playing strength.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2021-May-27, 17:05, said:

---

I still have a chance to go wrong.
Lacking other agreements, 3♣ limit raise, intending to bid 4♥.
Now I have given partner enough information for him to make a penalty double.
I have extra heart length, shortness in diamonds and ♣AK. ♠984 are awful and East's known spade holding is sitting over declarer.
With ♠ control would I pull the X to 5♥?

No!

If you had a spade control, you would not have a fit jump, unless your control was a stiff or void. You’d then either have 10-11 cards in your two suits, or partner has done something very strange with her double of 5D...that double should NOT be based on a stiff diamond.

If you has 10 cards, say x Kxxxx xx AQxxxx, I’d splinter rather than do a fit jump...in spades with that, in diamonds with 2=5=1=5

So it’s very unlikely you should override partner.

Put another way: pull this double and you had better make 5H. I don’t care if they were making 5D. Partnerships should aim on playing consistent, trustworthy bridge. Describing your hand then overruling partner is not the way to be trustworthy. Neither is misdescribing your hand, such that you then feel pressure to overrule.