How might we have bid it?

And Peter's Response:

Hi Carlyn,

Holding a singleton club, responder probably took a conservative view of things in only bidding five. A bid of 6C would have been appropriate on the expectation that opener had, at most, a one loser suit.

Independently of responder's action, your 4C bid did not correctly describe the trick-taking potential of the hand.

Even by traditional standards, where pre-emptive bids have been based on the "rule of two and three", this hand is worth a 5C opening.

In case you are not familiar with the "rule of two and three", it is a rule of thumb method for judging how high to open the bidding if the decision is taken to open with a pre-emptive bid.

It dictates that your hand be evaluated in terms of the number of tricks you expect to make if your long suit is trumps, then, open the bidding at a level three tricks higher if non-vulnerable, and two tricks when vulnerable.

The more aggressive modern style adopts a "rule of 1.5, 2, 3 or 4" according to vulnerable vs not vulnerable, vulnerable vs vulnerable, not vulnerable vs not vulnerable, and not vulnerable vs vulnerable, respectively.

Whatever your evaluation methods, this nine card holding is a nine trick suit.

The auction I like is:

5C (P) 5NT (P)

7C (all P)