[jonottawa]

I assume that the default agreement would be 2♠ is 4SF. YMMV.

I'd force to game with the E hand opposite an opener (especially a club opener, we could have a grand slam opposite a prime minimum if no wasteage in ♠) unless we had an ultra light style. YMMV.

I give W 100% of the blame for the bidding misunderstanding but as someone said 5♦ isn't so bad a spot.

[bluecalm]

Both of them for not discussing their system obviously or one of them if it was discussed but forgotten.

[wickedbid1]

mr1303, on 2011-June-08, 18:10, said:

---

5D X went 1 down, which wasn't a very good score. Who's to blame?

East's bid is a little pushy, i agree. But the blame must be placed with West. West should know they hav not discussed the sequence, so 2 sp might be a reverse, or it might not. It is game forcing for sure, so the obvious bid is 2nt, right siding the nt contract with all those tenaces, if that is the denomination they r going to eventually play. Don't forget, these sequences often end in slam of one sort or another.

Pard will usually show di length next, so there will be time for spade support to be shown, if pr is looking for that.

If West has not thot like this & insists on bidding 3 sp, i do not understand the 3nt pull at all. West has shown his hand with THREE bids & pard is in control.

[awm]

Certainly the system misunderstanding is an issue.

However, I'd blame east for the aggressive game force. Once he forces game, where are you going to end up? 3NT seems worse than 5♦. East should be wondering where the spades are -- partner seems marked with spade length/values for the opponents not to be bidding and this is a very bad sign for a pushy game contract. A 3♦ rebid would've been enough, and avoids the systemic issue too.

[han]

Several people have called east's bid pushy, but to me the hand seems too strong to merely invite. I would certainly force to game.

[awm]

han, on 2011-June-18, 03:54, said:

Several people have called east's bid pushy, but to me the hand seems too strong to merely invite. I would certainly force to game.

The hand in isolation is quite good. If I was just told "partner opened 1♣, how good is this hand?" I would agree with game force as an initial evaluation. However, there has been a round of bidding before the actual decision needs to be made. This round of bidding has established that partner has hearts and clubs, that no one seems to be bidding spades, and that I have diamonds. If I was given that partner opened 1♣ and he has a singleton or void in diamonds then I would definitely not want to force game on this hand! Do I know partner has short diamonds? While he doesn't necessarily have to, it seems hard to believe that opponents have eleven or more spades and multiple chances to bid them at the one level, and never did. If we therefore think partner has 3+♠ then short diamonds are looking very likely (especially if you play Walsh and partner might rebid 1NT with 3424 or 3433).

In any case, if you think that East's hand is a clear game force then I very much think you should vote "no blame." The apparent misunderstanding about 2♠ was not material to the result on the hand. West's first two calls (1♣, 1♥) are without fault and once East decides to force game 5♦ seems the best available contract.

[wickedbid1]

awm, on 2011-June-18, 10:32, said:

The hand in isolation is quite good. If I was just told "partner opened 1♣, how good is this hand?" I would agree with game force as an initial evaluation. However, there has been a round of bidding before the actual decision needs to be made. This round of bidding has established that partner has hearts and clubs, that no one seems to be bidding spades, and that I have diamonds. If I was given that partner opened 1♣ and he has a singleton or void in diamonds then I would definitely not want to force game on this hand! Do I know partner has short diamonds? While he doesn't necessarily have to, it seems hard to believe that opponents have eleven or more spades and multiple chances to bid them at the one level, and never did. If we therefore think partner has 3+♠ then short diamonds are looking very likely (especially if you play Walsh and partner might rebid 1NT with 3424 or 3433).

In any case, if you think that East's hand is a clear game force then I very much think you should vote "no blame." The apparent misunderstanding about 2♠ was not material to the result on the hand. West's first two calls (1♣, 1♥) are without fault and once East decides to force game 5♦ seems the best available contract.

Playing pick-up one must forgive both the East who invites with this hand and the East who forces. It's a tweener, & one would really like to know if pard tends to open light or not.

West must be forgiven for refusing an invitational sequence, after all, with his non-fitting good textured 13 count.

Your hypothetical examples confuse me -- why r u not ALSO being told, as East, that West has the majors double stopped & his stiff di is the Jack? Surely then u r wanting to be in three nt on these cards? Surely then u r thinking that the worst that can happen is 4 di, 5 cl, or 5 di, all of which would make on a lot of layouts?

No, the clear culprit is West. Pulling 3nt seems unforgivable to me when he has already shown his 4 crd sp suit, and he has a fill card for his pard's suit, and no extras other than all that lovely texture. If pard wants to be in three NT i am quite proud of this dummy.

And 3 NT ought to make for them, as long as East has the foresight to start on the hrts quickly.

[Elianna]

wickedbid1, on 2011-June-18, 18:36, said:

And 3 NT ought to make for them, as long as East has the foresight to start on the hrts quickly.

2♠ + 2♥ + 1♦ = FAIL

and that's being very generous to declarer.

[y66]

I really like that 3D rebid idea proposed by awm.

[wickedbid1]

Elianna, on 2011-June-19, 00:33, said:

2♠ + 2♥ + 1♦ = FAIL

and that's being very generous to declarer.

U r quite right, unless the defenders r of the same level as the declaring side appears to be, in which case they might not start on sp (assuming sp to be 4-3 or 4-4 for dclarer), and North when in with the hrt j may not play sp either, as no entry & dummy's sp r sick to lead into... one can dream...

Swap either of the pointy tens to the other side, and 3nt is pretty good contract, so worth bidding.. but as i mentioned before, i would rather play from West than East on most layouts.0