[mfa1010]

mikeh, on 2010-December-01, 16:24, said:

We may not be able to count on 5 spades for the 3♠ call, but I think we can safely ignore his having 4 of a red suit when he rebids 4♠. Now the odds seem extremely high that he has 5+ spades.....

For me 4 of a red suit would be a cuebid and forwardgoing with spades. In a pinch I guess that it is possible to cuebid a queen if the hand is too good to sign off in 4♠. 4♣ is not a choice of strains, it is a strong raise in spades.

Quote

As for bidding 5♥....I think that that suggests a better suit, altho equivalent hand than we have. I admit that this isn't based on a great deal of real life experience with this sequence. Maybe Ax AKQxxx AKx AQ? IOW, I wouldn't expect partner to correct hearts to spades when he is 5=2 majors.

In my context partner has every reason to rebid spades with a five card suit. It would be exotic to start with 4♣ with 2-6 in the majors.

[mikeh]

mfa1010, on 2010-December-02, 14:26, said:

For me 4 of a red suit would be a cuebid and forwardgoing with spades. In a pinch I guess that it is possible to cuebid a queen if the hand is too good to sign off in 4♠. 4♣ is not a choice of strains, it is a strong raise in spades.


In my context partner has every reason to rebid spades with a five card suit. It would be exotic to start with 4♣ with 2-6 in the majors.

I'm interested in how you'd bid, say, Ax AKQxxx AKx AQ after (3♣) x (P) 3♠ (or Ax AKQxx AKxx AQ)?

If 4♣ is unambiguously always spades, what do you have available?

Surely 4♥ now is an underbid, even tho I appreciate that it is different from an immediate 4♥ overcall....the discussions I've seen in the BW on this difference seemed to me to suggest that the hand strength was more or less the same for each approach, but the double then bid showed more 'flexibility'. The example hand seems to me to be much stronger than would be shown (if I understand the discussions correctly) than the 'normal' expectancy from double then hearts.


This isn't intended to be a criticism...more a reflection of ignorance on my part, and interest in learning how you'd distinguish my suggested hand from say Axx AKQxx Axx Ax, where I'd double then bid 4♥. Maybe the answer is that the ability to make these distinctions isn't that important, since the odds of ever having the problem seem vanishingly small....I've rarely held such a hand and the only time I remember doing so, it was partner who preempted

[mfa1010]

mikeh, on 2010-December-02, 14:38, said:

I'm interested in how you'd bid, say, Ax AKQxxx AKx AQ after (3♣) x (P) 3♠ (or Ax AKQxx AKxx AQ)?

If 4♣ is unambiguously always spades, what do you have available?

Surely 4♥ now is an underbid, even tho I appreciate that it is different from an immediate 4♥ overcall....the discussions I've seen in the BW on this difference seemed to me to suggest that the hand strength was more or less the same for each approach, but the double then bid showed more 'flexibility'. The example hand seems to me to be much stronger than would be shown (if I understand the discussions correctly) than the 'normal' expectancy from double then hearts.


This isn't intended to be a criticism...more a reflection of ignorance on my part, and interest in learning how you'd distinguish my suggested hand from say Axx AKQxx Axx Ax, where I'd double then bid 4♥. Maybe the answer is that the ability to make these distinctions isn't that important, since the odds of ever having the problem seem vanishingly small....I've rarely held such a hand and the only time I remember doing so, it was partner who preempted

Ax AKQxxx AKx AQ

On this I would gamble slam (X then 6♥). In principle I have only two losers, and they are deep, so there will be many ways for one of them to disappear. If you made the hand a little weaker, I would bid 5♥ over 3♠.

Ax AKQxx AKxx AQ

5NT over 3♠. Again, I need very little from partner for slam. If my hand were a little weaker, I would bid 4NT natural over 3♠. Here it comes in handy that 4♣ shows spade support. To keycard for spades, I would have to start 4♣ and then bid 4NT.

Axx AKQxx Axx Ax

Yes, double then 4♥ shows flexibility. This is a strong hand for this sequence.