[Fluffy]

♠J
♥J109xxx
♦Kx
♣KQxx


all vul, IMPs

(1♠)-X-(4♣) splinter

what's your plan?

[billw55]

I guess I'll try a 5♥ pre-sac.

[aguahombre]

Is my partner one who doubled in the other thread?

[Codo]

5 ♥ and sell out to 5 ♠...

[Fluffy]

aguahombre, on 2013-January-16, 17:26, said:

Is my partner one who doubled in the other thread?

negative

[wyman]

I'll also bid 5H. glo

[gnasher]

What's all this talk of sacrificing? I'm hoping to make game.

I'd bid 4♥, then 4NT over 4♠ to suggest 5-4 or 6-4 (5♣ would show five). If partner is 1435, for example, and we are missing ♠A plus a round-suit ace, we have to play in the suit where we don't have the ace. If we do that and they try to get a ruff by leading the side suit, we may be able to cut their communications by playing three rounds of diamonds.

In fact, they'll probably compete to 5♠. Defending 5♠ undoubled is probably not our par result. By exchanging more information now we'll improve our chances of making a correct decision.

[lycier]

I would like to bid 4♥.

[billw55]

gnasher, on 2013-January-17, 03:30, said:

In fact, they'll probably compete to 5♠ if they have a pulse. Defending 5♠ undoubled is probably not our par result. By exchanging more information now we'll improve our chances of making a correct decision. give them more room to explore.

fixed

[gnasher]

If you think that they're always going to bid 5♠ (not an unreasonable assumption), how will it help you to take away their space, and what are you worried that they may explore?

[billw55]

gnasher, on 2013-January-17, 07:53, said:

If you think that they're always going to bid 5♠ (not an unreasonable assumption), how will it help you to take away their space, and what are you worried that they may explore?

I was thinking that giving them room to cuebid at the 5 level, or to ask keycards, will help them make their slam decision correctly.

[mikeh]

gnasher, on 2013-January-17, 03:30, said:

What's all this talk of sacrificing? I'm hoping to make game.

I'd bid 4♥, then 4NT over 4♠ to suggest 5-4 or 6-4 (5♣ would show five). If partner is 1435, for example, and we are missing ♠A plus a round-suit ace, we have to play in the suit where we don't have the ace. If we do that and they try to get a ruff by leading the side suit, we may be able to cut their communications by playing three rounds of diamonds.

In fact, they'll probably compete to 5♠. Defending 5♠ undoubled is probably not our par result. By exchanging more information now we'll improve our chances of making a correct decision.

We must be looking at different hands/auctions.

It seems reasonable to infer that everyone is minimum in hcp. I would be pretty confident that partner holds 4 hearts, and that responder holds at least 2 and often 3, since with 5=5 he might well have used a fit jump rather than a splinter. This makes opener fairly likely to be 6=0=3=4, and our chances of defeating 5♠ would seem remote.

Picking hands is a mug's game if you then base your calls on the few hands you pick, but picking a few to give one a sense of the foreseeable can be of help. I would double 1♠ with x AKQx xxxx Jxxx as one example and I suspect that on this forum that decision would be close to unanimous. If opener is QJxxxx void Axx Axxx and responder AKxxx xxx QJ10x x, and this is surely consistent with the auction, we aren't beating grand.

I am not for one moment going to bid on that pessimistic assumption but it seems to me to highlight the risks inherent in doubling 5♠, which appears to be one of the options that Andy considers.

If S is void in hearts, and partner is 1=4=4=4, then I would expect slam to make about 50% of the time, NS. In the meantime, we are at grave risk of a number. The hand where they make grand takes 7 tricks on defence against our heart contracts, and we are red. They have telegraphed the defence of club A, ruff, diamond, ruff, another diamond and a spade. Even if they can't get 2 diamond tricks and thus lose a ruff as well, they have us for 800 against their 680.

Otoh, if hearts are 2-1 and partner has something like x AKxx xxxx A10xx and the diamond A is with responder, we are stiff for 5♥.

All of which means that we really are guessing here.

I am going to pass the splinter. I see nothing gained from bidding 5♥ since opener is bidding 5♠ (or making a forcing pass) and I'm going to be guessing over 5♠ anyway.

I am not going to use Andy's plan, tho it has attractions and would be my second choice. Indeed, I would follow that against strong opps. But against most opps, I'll try an old ploy...so old that many won't have encountered it very often. I will pass and then bid 5♥. Yes I give them a free cuebid, but I don't expect them to use it or, if they do, to get a lot of benefit out of it.

I'm not claiming this is theoretically best, but I think there is going to be a lot of guesswork here and most opps won't have encountered this approach and may make the wrong 'last guess' whereas if I bid now, I am probably going to have to make the wrong last guess.

I think it inherent in this approach that I intend to defend 5♠ undoubled. If I didn't plan for that, I'd bid 4♥.

Edit: Of course, if I took as long at the table as I did here, to pass, I would bid, since tanking and then later bidding destroys much of whatever psychological edge this strategy may have against moderate or weaker opps. But this is the sort of decision that I think most of us learn to make quickly at the table, even if we immediately regret it It is often better to make the second-best call in tempo than the better call only after a long tank.

[gnasher]

I didn't say I was doubling 5♠. But if I show 6-4 in hearts and clubs, and then partner doubles 5♠, I'm certainly leaving it in. If I show 6-4 in hearts and clubs and partner chooses to compete to the six-level he'll probably be right. Even if those are the only ways we can gain, it seems better to allow for those than to choose a route that will lead to a unilateral guess over 5♠.

Regarding Mike's constructions, if RHO had a choice between a 3-level fit jump and a 4-level splinter, it seems to me quite likely that he'd choose the splinter even when 5251, and he'd certainly splinter with 6241. Opener's having a heart void is certainly possible, but "fairly likely" seems a gross overstatement. And there's no reason to assume that they have three aces either. If I had to guess who was light on this auction, I would pick responder, then opener, then partner.

All in all, it seems very pessimistic to start by positing a layout where the opponents have four first-round controls, a working side-suit queen, a working side-suit jack and a working side-suit ten.

Of course, if opener does have a heart void it would be nice to know. If I bid now I may glean useful information from whether and how quickly he bids over 4♥, and over my subsequent 4NT.

[billw55]

mikeh, on 2013-January-17, 10:10, said:

I am not going to use Andy's plan, tho it has attractions and would be my second choice. Indeed, I would follow that against strong opps. But against most opps, I'll try an old ploy...so old that many won't have encountered it very often. I will pass and then bid 5♥. Yes I give them a free cuebid, but I don't expect them to use it or, if they do, to get a lot of benefit out of it.

I'm not claiming this is theoretically best, but I think there is going to be a lot of guesswork here and most opps won't have encountered this approach and may make the wrong 'last guess' whereas if I bid now, I am probably going to have to make the wrong last guess.

I don't really understand your reasoning. Why should they be *more* likely to make a wrong guess, when they have *more* room to exchange information? And why shouldn't their 5-level cuebids be of much use?

[Fluffy]

I never though opener would fail to cuebid giving where ♣KQ lie, but mike is right, everyone is light on this deal so might happen.

[Fluffy]

Geting to the 6 level is probably going to be 2310 points better than selling out. Both tables pushed at -650, on one of them NS didn't even enter the auction.

---