[kenrexford]

han, on Oct 21 2008, 11:46 PM, said:

How about bidding 4C with that hand?

A 4♣ call typically shows an unbalanced hand (something like 5-4-3-1 shape). However, in retrospect, that might have worked out OK. I either bid 6NT or 6♣, depending on what partner does. My fear, however, was that partner, with at most one of the top three clubs and at most one Ace, would not often enough raise/support clubs if I bid that way, whereas 5NT (I thought) forced him to consider clubs.

[han]

Maybe 5NT is theoretically better but in practice an undiscussed 5NT is losing bridge. Now, I'm not saying that winning should be everybody's priority, yours may well be different.

[kenrexford]

han, on Oct 22 2008, 09:51 AM, said:

Maybe 5NT is theoretically better but in practice an undiscussed 5NT is losing bridge. Now, I'm not saying that winning should be everybody's priority, yours may well be different.

I understand the general theory, but if partner cannot go wrong, and likes this sort of thing, WTP?

My hand is borderline between forcing the slam and "very strongly inviting" the slam anyway. If he passes, that's probably right (it should have been). If he bids 6♣, I obviously pass. If he bids anything else, I bid 6NT and consider that a fair chance contract. I know that he will not bid 7NT after an undiscussed 5NT.

[Tcyk]

kenrexford, on Oct 22 2008, 08:19 PM, said:

han, on Oct 22 2008, 09:51 AM, said:

Maybe 5NT is theoretically better but in practice an undiscussed 5NT is losing bridge. Now, I'm not saying that winning should be everybody's priority, yours may well be different.

I understand the general theory, but if partner cannot go wrong, and likes this sort of thing, WTP?

My hand is borderline between forcing the slam and "very strongly inviting" the slam anyway. If he passes, that's probably right (it should have been). If he bids 6♣, I obviously pass. If he bids anything else, I bid 6NT and consider that a fair chance contract. I know that he will not bid 7NT after an undiscussed 5NT.

5NT looks like pick a slam to me. I'd probably bid 4+ card suits up the line

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Oct 22 2008, 03:19 PM, said:

han, on Oct 22 2008, 09:51 AM, said:

Maybe 5NT is theoretically better but in practice an undiscussed 5NT is losing bridge. Now, I'm not saying that winning should be everybody's priority, yours may well be different.

I understand the general theory, but if partner cannot go wrong, and likes this sort of thing, WTP?

Partner passed a bid you intended to be forcing, at slam level, and you think "partner cannot go wrong"???

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Oct 26 2008, 11:27 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Oct 22 2008, 03:19 PM, said:

han, on Oct 22 2008, 09:51 AM, said:

Maybe 5NT is theoretically better but in practice an undiscussed 5NT is losing bridge. Now, I'm not saying that winning should be everybody's priority, yours may well be different.

I understand the general theory, but if partner cannot go wrong, and likes this sort of thing, WTP?

Partner passed a bid you intended to be forcing, at slam level, and you think "partner cannot go wrong"???

I was not upset by the pass, and "cannot go wrong" works, because I stretched for my 5NT call. If partner passes, as he did, then his hand will be utterly disgusting, as it was. I forgot to add that my diamonds were Q10 tight. Partner held A9xxx in diamonds. The total hand was something like ♠QJx ♥Kx ♦A98xx ♣KJx. I liked stopping in 5NT, despite the diamond Jack being stiff and partner playing the diamond Jack first, and the spade King being well-placed.

[rogerclee]

Quote

I was not upset by the pass, and "cannot go wrong" works, because I stretched for my 5NT call.

Partner has no idea what you showed, and you have no idea what you showed, but it's okay, because you stretched to show whatever it is you didn't know you showed?

Quote

If partner passes, as he did, then his hand will be utterly disgusting

I thought we established that nobody knows what 5NT means, so I'm not sure what hands partner is bidding on with or passing.

Quote

I liked stopping in 5NT

I usually prefer to stop in 4NT.

[kenrexford]

To me, 5NT was not ambiguous, as I felt that it was choice-of-slams and invited a minor call. However, I was willing to risk the "very highly invitational" interpretation because partner would only pass with absolute junk (like he had). Thus, if my bid is calculated to always yield an acceptable result even when misunderstood, why not make that call?

Am I the only one that has this situation occur? Any given bid at any given time might not have fully discussed meaning. However, if all predictable actions by partner, consistent with all plausible interpretations, lead to the right result, you make that bid, assuming also that no other more clarified call handles the situation better.

[han]

If you knew for sure that partner would take 5NT as one of the two ways you meant it and you were fine with either meaning and the auction would likely be over soon then it seems fine.

I have made bids where I was not 100% sure how partner would interpret it but I knew that whether partner would take it one way or the other, it would work out alright. These are rare situations though and they are dangerous because every call later in the auction will be ambiguous to both. Also, partner might not know that you are fine with both and will try hard to figure out how you meant your call, spending some time in agony which is a bad idea when you are playing in a serious game.

I would be worried that partner interprets 5NT as a grand slam try. Another possible interpretation is pick a slam with 4-4 in the minors. When partner bids 6D and you pull to 6NT he might think that you were not looking for a minor suit contract and still bid 7NT. But you know your partner better than I do.

[jdonn]

kenrexford, on Oct 27 2008, 11:32 AM, said:

Am I the only one that has this situation occur? Any given bid at any given time might not have fully discussed meaning. However, if all predictable actions by partner, consistent with all plausible interpretations, lead to the right result, you make that bid, assuming also that no other more clarified call handles the situation better.

I find it difficult to believe, given that there are at least some who think they can pass 5NT, and at least some who believe they can bid 7NT, that all partner's predictable actions lead to the right result.

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Oct 27 2008, 12:23 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Oct 27 2008, 11:32 AM, said:

Am I the only one that has this situation occur?  Any given bid at any given time might not have fully discussed meaning.  However, if all predictable actions by partner, consistent with all plausible interpretations, lead to the right result, you make that bid, assuming also that no other more clarified call handles the situation better.

I find it difficult to believe, given that there are at least some who think they can pass 5NT, and at least some who believe they can bid 7NT, that all partner's predictable actions lead to the right result.

Well, I suppose Han resolved that issue. The one thing I knew for sure was that this partner would NEVER assume that 5NT was a grand slam invite and hence would never bid a grand. His options would be pass, 6♣ (which I can pass), or 6♦, which I can correct.