[kgr]

Scoring: IMP

---

(p)-1♠-(DBL)-1NT=transfer ♣
(p)-2♠-(4♥)-5♣
(5♥)-....pass-(p)-5NT
(p)-6♣-all pass
 
1NT=transfer ♣
2♠=2 weak bids possible: 2♣ and 2♠, probably 6c♠ and no 4♣'s
What do you think of my bidding here?
- 5NT was meant as: pick a slam partner.
- non-forcing 5♣ followed by 5NT. Is 5♣ wrong or is 5NT wrong OR are they both ok because situation changed enough by the 5♥ bid?
- partners pass after 5♥ was slow...Is 5NT still ok then?...(I think that 5NT is more ethic then DBL then. We have no real agreements about forcing pass, but it looks like we will never pass this out)

Scoring: IMP

---

You are in 6♣. Lead is a small ♥, RHO playing the ♥Q and you ruff.
How do you continue?
RHO will not follow ♣'s if you play them.
- ruffing finesse in ♠?
- finesse ♦
- play ♦ from top
Or will you combine ♠ and ♦ play?

[gnasher]

I think your bidding was reasonable. It's unclear whether partner was thinking of doubling or thinking of bidding, so his pause probably doesn't constrain you.

In 6♣, I'd play for ♠AK on my right, but try to cater for singleton ♦Q too. I lead a spade at trick 2. Say that RHO wins and plays back a trump (it's similar after a heart return, but slightly different after a low spade return). I win in hand and cash one trump and ♦K. If nothing happens on that trick, I cross to ♣Q and take a ruffing finesse in spades.

If LHO has a trump left and RHO started with a ♠AKxx, RHO may hold off twice; if so I ruff the third spade high, draw trumps, and then try to get diamonds right, using whatever information I have about their heart length from the bidding and lead.

It sounds as though I'd have gone down on the actual layout, because my ♦K would get ruffed. Oh well.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2009-December-06, 08:19

[Codo]

I like the bidding and had not changed the table result.

RHO had shown a very strong hand with very long hearts. I play him for both spade honours and follow Andys line.

[GijsH]

On the bidding: I think 5NT must be "natural". It cannot be "pick a slam" as you were happy to play in 5♣ before. I would simply bid a practical 6♣ myself over 5♥.

On the play: I would ruff the ♥ lead, cash trump A and lead ♠ 10. RHO will win and might return a ♦, reluctant for the ♥ ruff and discard? If he does play the ♥, I ruff and start playing all trumps. I am not convinced RHO has both ♠ honnours (esp. when RHO wins ♠ ace). Maybe there is a show-up squeeze or a real squeeze in the making.
Failing any squeeze I play for the ♦ 's to drop, unless I see RHO discarding many ♠ 's and can count him as 4-8-1-0. He might well be 3-8-2-0 and that is more likely.

[kgr]

Thanks!
RHO had AKx=AQxxxxxx=Qx=v
Both plays are ok, as long as you don't play like I did (take ♦ finesse)

[aguahombre]

minor note: the original xfer showing clubs is usually not game forcing. 4NT instead of 5C would have shown approximately your hand--about 5-7 in the minors.

[kgr]

aguahombre, on Dec 8 2009, 01:06 AM, said:

minor note: the original xfer showing clubs is usually not game forcing. 4NT instead of 5C would have shown approximately your hand--about 5-7 in the minors.

That is probably right..if partner does not take if for RKC for ♠ because I have no other forcing way to raise ♠; Or is it preferred to drop RKC and use 4NT for other means in these competitive auctions?

[aguahombre]

forget rkc after xfer over 1MX. there are too many other ways to create game force and/or show spade support. This hand, with 12 minor suit cards is highly unusual, and the highly unusual 4NT would probably get the message across.

[gnasher]

GijsH, on Dec 7 2009, 04:21 PM, said:

On the play: I would ruff the ♥ lead, cash trump A and lead ♠ 10. RHO will win and might return a ♦, reluctant for the ♥ ruff and discard? If he does play the ♥, I ruff and start playing all trumps. I am not convinced RHO has both ♠ honnours (esp. when RHO wins ♠ ace). Maybe there is a show-up squeeze or a real squeeze in the making.

Would you care to write down a layout where one of the opponents is squeezed?

[GijsH]

Quote

Would you care to write down a layout where one of the opponents is squeezed?

Certainly! Give West: ♠Kxx ♥10xx ♦Qxx ♣xxxx
and he will be in a simple pointed suits squeeze. This hand is about right for bidding 5♥. With 3 small ♦ W might throw a ♦ as a show-up squeeze.
Either way, as long as the ♠K does not show up, declarer plays the ♦ from the top (starting with the K) and will prevail in most situations, even if W has 4card ♦.

Got it?

[gnasher]

GijsH, on Dec 8 2009, 09:21 AM, said:

Quote

Would you care to write down a layout where one of the opponents is squeezed?

Certainly! Give West: ♠Kxx ♥10xx ♦Qxx ♣xxxx
and he will be in a simple pointed suits squeeze. This hand is about right for bidding 5♥. With 3 small ♦ W might throw a ♦ as a show-up squeeze.
Either way, as long as the ♠K does not show up, declarer plays the ♦ from the top (starting with the K) and will prevail in most situations, even if W has 4card ♦.

Got it?

That would work very well if you had been dealt nine clubs. Unfortunately, however, you have only seven.

After you've played all your trumps, you will still have all five of your diamonds. Are you hoping that at this point West will have only three cards?