[jillybean]

---

IMP, not in NZ

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

And yes, it is quite likely that 7H have good chances, but
for starters, the X of 6S told you, p has no interest going
further.
And "Take the money and run" is usually the best strategy,
compared to hunting the gold at the end of the rainbow,
obviously it is the boring choice.

[DavidKok]

I think we should pass now.
I don't like 6♥ last round. Why not 6♣ or 5♠, telling partner we're enthusiastic about bidding more and describing our hand?

[mikeh]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-March-17, 23:34, said:

Pass.

And yes, it is quite likely that 7H have good chances, but
for starters, the X of 6S told you, p has no interest going
further.
And "Take the money and run" is usually the best strategy,
compared to hunting the gold at the end of the rainbow,
obviously it is the boring choice.

That’s not how most would play the double. It’s been standard, for many years, that the double simply warns partner that doubler lacks first round control, while passing is forcing, of course, and promises first round control.

I’m not a fan of the auction but I can’t construct a hand where 7H isn’t at least 90% likely to make. Indeed, I really hate 6H for that reason. If not willing to bid grand over 5H, I just don’t understand not bidding 5S. 6H is just giving up…fortunately (assuming grand makes) poor old South saved us. Of course, he couldn’t assume that we can make grand after our auction,

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2026-March-18, 01:05, said:

I think we should pass now.
I don't like 6♥ last round. Why not 6♣ or 5♠, telling partner we're enthusiastic about bidding more and describing our hand?

I considered that issue but think that 6C denies first round spade control.

[DavidKok]

 mikeh, on 2026-March-18, 01:07, said:

I considered that issue but think that 6C denies first round spade control.

I play that 5♠ shows first round control and 6♣ shows clubs, but I had different agreements with different partners about which took priority. It's a 'strain before level' versus 'their suit is vital' debate.

On second thought I don't like 6♣ here as that is NF for me. Sorry, it was not a good suggestion.

For what it's worth, I do not and have never played partner's double as denying first round control. However, all hands without it are expected to double, as we've failed to bid 5♠ last round so from partner's perspective the grand is hopeless.

90% seems like a lot. We need partner to have ♦A, the trumps to come in without issue, to have sufficient communication and to not suffer a club ruff on lead. The odds are fine but maybe not quite that great. On the auction I'm playing partner for something like a 1=7=4=1, but e.g. 1=6=3=3 could be lethal, as could 2=7=4=0.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2026-March-18, 01:26, said:

90% seems like a lot. We need partner to have ♦A, the trumps to come in without issue, to have sufficient communication and to not suffer a club ruff on lead. The odds are fine but maybe not quite that great. On the auction I'm playing partner for something like a 1=7=4=1, but e.g. 1=6=3=3 could be lethal, as could 2=7=4=0.

You may only need partner to hold the Ace of diamonds if they lead one. If they lead the normal trump ...

[mw64ahw]

Not a situation I come across very often at a club level. Most will sacrifice at the 5-level, but not 6. Even if I'd gone 5♠ the reply would likely be 6♥. On balance I think 7♥ makes as partner was happy with 5♥ and their hcp (extras) have to fit somewhere.

[jillybean]

Of course I don't have any agreements at this level, 5S would have been a better choice than 6H.
I thought the chances of 7 were too great, so bid it.

---

edit

mikeh, on 2026-March-18, 01:06, said:

It’s been standard, for many years, that the double simply warns partner that doubler lacks first round control, while passing is forcing, of course, and promises first round control.

digesting this, it seems almost backwards. Partner lacks first round control in spades?
Of course it can't be purely penalty, is it optional, I though if partner had ♠Kx we can perhaps get rid of diamond = 7

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2026-March-18, 01:26, said:

I play that 5♠ shows first round control and 6♣ shows clubs, but I had different agreements with different partners about which took priority. It's a 'strain before level' versus 'their suit is vital' debate.

On second thought I don't like 6♣ here as that is NF for me. Sorry, it was not a good suggestion.

For what it's worth, I do not and have never played partner's double as denying first round control. However, all hands without it are expected to double, as we've failed to bid 5♠ last round so from partner's perspective the grand is hopeless.

90% seems like a lot. We need partner to have ♦A, the trumps to come in without issue, to have sufficient communication and to not suffer a club ruff on lead. The odds are fine but maybe not quite that great. On the auction I'm playing partner for something like a 1=7=4=1, but e.g. 1=6=3=3 could be lethal, as could 2=7=4=0.

David: 2S promised a limit raise or better. Iow, we created a force only to 3H. Partner thought that bidding 5H was a good idea opposite a limit raise. I tried, and failed, to construct a hand and a heart suit that would bid 5H and offer less than around 90% for grand. He lacks three aces!

This morning I pictured x KQxxxx AKxxx x, which would be less than 90% but still good enough to justify bidding. But while my 90% was a slight overbid, I think it fair to say that ‘most’ hands on which he’d bid 5H opposite a limit raise will in fact be laydown.

[paulg]

jillybean, on 2026-March-18, 07:01, said:

---

edit

digesting this, it seems almost backwards. Partner lacks first round control in spades?
Of course it can't be purely penalty, is it optional, I though if partner had ♠Kx we can perhaps get rid of diamond = 7

The theory, or thought process, is that partner's double is to stop you bidding any more and the reason is normally because they do not have a spade control. Partner may also double because they do not believe that the grand slam will have any chance.

A pass over 6♠ is therefore more encouraging. It implies that partner is interested in the grand slam and has first-round spade control.

On a competitive hand where a lot of space has been consumed and the information exchanged between partners is less than ideal, such decisions can be quite delicate. In particular very fast actions should be avoided.