[mtvesuvius]

2♣ was Strong, no agreements on partner's pass. Partner is an expert, but you haven't discussed much. Your call?

---

[dake50]

No agreements on forcing pass after 2C?
Not even default -- they get doubled or we play?
Partner gives you a chance for penalty double bonanza.
Won't go there. Wish my spades were in on first round.
Now I guess 5C =pick a slam. Surely no 2-suiter agreements
if no forcing pass agreements (eg. 5NT pick S-D;
Q-bid 5C pick H-D; Q-bid 6C pick H-S).

[kayin801]

4NT as 2 suits? I don't think much of my jacks but with the A and K and partner probably having a balanced hand lacking massive club values we've gotta have great play for slam. With a bad 2 suiter I might have just tried the major after partner's pass, so I think pulling partner's 5♥ to 5♠ is forcing and shows the pointed suits.

[mikeh]

LHO has bid very very strangely, red v white, but i think he may be getting away with it. Maybe he has Kxxxxxxxx in clubs and felt unable to bid 1st seat red v white.

I think an expert partner would assume that double by him would suggest defending...ie. a strong notrump type of hand, while a bid would be a one-suiter, and pass is forcing...I therefore expect 4+ support for one of my two suits, and I am prepared to drive to slam if we find a fit...so I bid 5♣. I raise 5♦ to 6♦, bid 5♠ over 5♥ and raise 5♠ to 6♠. We can and will reach grand on some hands on which it is cold.

Coming up with hands for this sequence is going to be unproductive but to give some idea of possible hand types I offer:

Kx AQxxx AKQxx A, KQx AQxx AKQx Qx (this latter hand is obviously of the strong nt variety but still looks takeout oriented to me)

[mtvesuvius]

mikeh, on 2010-November-18, 17:53, said:

LHO has bid very very strangely, red v white

Sorry, had VUL backwards, fixed now.

[Fluffy]

I would had bid 2♠ the round before, this hand should be worth it in most 2♣ schemes.


I think partner doesn't want penalties in 4♣ and to me that's just enough for slam as others have said before, don't see much difference between 4NT and 5♣, I think 4NT can be taken as nat or in another level even as blackwood so I think 5♣ with a new partner is the right bid.

[mike gill]

I would choose the 5♣ route and bid 5♠ over 5♥ and raise 5♦ to slam.

[ArtK78]

I would expect partner to have a balanced hand without great club length.

I would bid 5♣, and then bid 5♠ over 5♥. This has to be forcing.

[mike gill]

I didn't specify but I think pass is clearly forcing and should show a hand with little wastage and/or short clubs. double would be a suggestion of defense usually with 3+ clubs and secondary club values.

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2010-November-18, 18:25, said:

I would had bid 2♠ the round before, this hand should be worth it in most 2♣ schemes.

Me too.

[mike777]

5c.....

old adage x or cuebid with tough hands with no clear bids.



---

btw never 2s not even close.

[mike777]

mike gill, on 2010-November-19, 15:00, said:

I didn't specify but I think pass is clearly forcing and should show a hand with little wastage and/or short clubs. double would be a suggestion of defense usually with 3+ clubs and secondary club values.

2d was gf so of course pass is forcing

[dake50]

For those not showing spades on the first round.
Is 2 honor 5-suit not up to standard? Or which two honors in 10-count? AK,AQ,AJ,KQ,KJ?
Is 10 hcp with partner's 22+ not in slam zone?
Little deduction for short honors
when partner is expected to have gobs of fitting honors.
How do you catch up when preempted? As here?
Can you not Key-ask to get SKQ missing?
Don't you overload 2D when 5-5 two suiter starts shaping-out later?
Get 5-5 shown below 3NT?

[nige1]

mtvesuvius, on 2010-November-18, 17:31, said:

2♣ was Strong, no agreements on partner's pass. Partner is an expert, but you haven't discussed much. Your call?

---

IMO 5♣ = 10, 4N = 9, 4♠ = 8.
_X would be penalty, IMO, but I'm still frightened to bid 4N in case partner thinks it is natural e.g.
♠ xxx ♥ xxx ♦ Qxxx ♣ AQ

[Apollo81]

I would bid 4♦. Yes, it's not a major, nor is it our best suit, but it is the only call available which is both descriptive and forcing.