0

In the game of Spade, the Big 5 conventions (invent by Herm Carney and Roger Denino, as stated here and here) means that if the first partner bids 5 it signals to the second partner that she can cover a Nil bid. That is to say, if partners play by this convention, the first bidder only bids 5 when she have certain hand that can cover a partner Nil.

I found the exact rules of when to bid 5 are vague. Of course every couple can decide upon a slightly different convention, however I am interested in the original\popular convention.

I play that the first bidder only bids 5 if have:

  1. Ace or King of spade

  2. 4 to 6 takes

  3. in each side-suit one of the following options:

    a. Void

    b. Singelton higher than {5}

    c. Doubleton higher than {5,8}

    d. A honor card

My question is, what exactly a bid of 5 by the first partner represent in the big 5 convention?

The vagueness is mostly in section 3 (cover in side suits). Another issue I suspect needs to be defined better: if you only have a single spade (Ace or king) is it still acceptable for a bid of 5?

|improve this question
  • 1
    Is the convention "if someone is able to bid 5, then they can probably cover a nil", or is it "only bid 5 if you can cover a nil"? I suspect it might be the former. Your list sounds more like you can maybe bid 7. – AndyT Aug 8 '18 at 13:22
  • you right, the former: only bid 5 if you can cover a nil. I am looking to find exact rules of what it meant to be able to cover Nil. Since only sections 1+2 is not enough but section 3 can be different than what I suggested. – Cohensius Aug 9 '18 at 9:17
  • 1
    "The former" means "the first thing listed" i.e. "If someone is able to bid 5, then they can probably cover a nil". The opposite would be "the latter". Given this, your comment makes no sense. – AndyT Aug 9 '18 at 9:19
  • That said, having now read your first link it definitely says "only bid 5 if you can cover a nil" and goes through all the guidelines. I don't see the vagueness. – AndyT Aug 9 '18 at 9:24
  • you are right again, I meant the latter. The vagueness is in section 3. In the links they don't specify section 3, just say that you need a cover in sides suits. – Cohensius Aug 9 '18 at 9:33

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.