[mr1303]

---

Everything broke nicely and 13 tricks were cold.

Who should do what differently?

[nige1]

mr1303, on 2013-August-22, 17:34, said:

Everything broke nicely and 13 tricks were cold.

Who should do what differently?

---

IMO you'd benefit from more definition. For example, if 4♠ were exclusion, then you might reach the grand.

[gnasher]

nige1, on 2013-August-22, 17:43, said:

IMO you'd benefit from more definition. For example, if 4♠ were exclusion, then you might reach the grand.

It's certainly a good idea to know what your bids mean, but how would Exclusion get you to 7♥ when you want to be in it and not when you don't?

[mike777]

4s(ex)=5c(1-4)
6c(kc, grand try)=7h

my problem is I am far from sure 4s would be exclusion ......rats... if kickback I would need to get lucky.

[gnasher]

If 4♠ is agreed as a void-showing splinter, North should probably bid 5♦. With 4♠ known to be unknown, North's actual choice is understandable, because of the risk that 5♦ would be interpreted as two key cards.

When North jumps to 6♥, South might bid 7♥. He also knows that the partnership is in unknown territory, so North's jump to 6♥ probably shows what he had: a suitable hand where he doesn't know what any of the in-between bids mean. North is almost certain to have ♥A, and ♦K is also likely. If ♦K is missing, that's not the end of the world.

Going back a step, if South knew 4♠ was undiscussed, it was unwise to bid it. The best way to find out what a bid means is by not bidding it, then discussing it later. And 4♠ is hardly a panacea anyway. He would have done better just to start cue-bidding and try to find out about a diamond control.

By the way, with the North hand I'd have been raising to game.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2013-August-23, 01:53