bucky

Do you play that 3♣ commits us to game? If not (many play that 3♣ shows inv+), then 3♥ might be viewed as a counter-game-try. And if 3♥ is not length + strength + slam interest, then perhaps you do need the 4♥ bid to convey that meaning. In any case, I do not think 4♥ should be automatically taken as splinter without discussion.

It is imperative to have bids that set up major suit as trump after 1NT - 2C - 2M. Just as a general principle, being able to set up trump in earlier bidding will greatly clarify later bids. The 3♦ bid here, even if agreed as not to deny spade support yet, runs the risk of complicating further bids with the ambiguity. Some of the bids mentioned by others are semi-standard (e.g. 3OM showing support with stiff somewhere, 4C as RKC, 4D as balanced slam try with support), although recently I saw an article advocating to switch the meanings of 4C and 4D to conserve room after balanced slam try. Lacking these methods, a simpler agreement is to use the OM bid as setting up M as trump. Here, after 1NT-2♣-2♠, 3♥ is pretty much an idle bid in many structures, therefore it can be used to announce spade fit and at least mild slam interest.

I probably wouldn't want to risk it at the table, but the 3N bid really ought to be for minors. Had partner wanted to bid a natural 3NT (unlikely, but I imagine some running minors with spade stopper is not impossible), he/she could have bid 3NT right after the 3♦ call.

Or maybe doubling 3♦, followed by 4♣ over opp's 3♠? A confusing 3NT should be avoided if possible.

In the hand you initially gave, there was one less club and one more diamond than the actual hand. If anything, it made 4♥ even more appealing with shorter clubs. East's decision for GF 2♣ is also interesting. Many probably would simply have treated it as limit raise.

What is the point of this thread? In an open event where any team can join, anything can happen on qualification round.

Partner not only "need not have a powerhouse", he certain does not, and actually he should have less than minimum takeout at 1-level. Still, with 5 hearts, good controls, no wasted value in diamonds, I bid what's in front of me: 4♥

What type of hand can bid this way but not opened with 2♣? 6-7-0-0? Even then, it is quite shocking to make a non-forcing 3♠ followed by slam try...

That's why in 2/1 you have a distinct range of 12-14 OR 18-19 for the 2NT bid. Partner treats it as 12-14, but you will bid again after partner's supposed sign-off, when holding 18-19.

Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Just because he rates himself as advanced, doesn't mean he IS advanced. In fact the self-rating can be so inaccurate that people have coined a new word called BBO-expert.

1♥ -- 2♣ 2NT -- 3♥ 3NT -- 4NT 5♣ -- 6♣ 6NT -- 7NT 2♣ = game force 2NT = 12-14 or 18-19 balanced, side suits stopped 3NT = serious slam try with spade control 5♣ = 1 or 4 (must be 4) 6♣ = tell me your 3rd round control in clubs 6NT = ♣Q, no extra cards than already showed 7NT = that's enough for me to count to 13 tricks

Thank you.

I think 3♠ is clearly wrong. Having passed earlier, I'd have to catch up with 4♠. If partner has load of clubs, he should pass and be happy to get plus score, as we likely cannot make anything.

Sorry my mind skips one trick ahead... I meant pass is clear-cut at MP.

I would be more nervous at IMPs. At MP this is clear-cut. This action doesn't have to work out EVERY TIME, it just need to gain often enough.

With (23)44 or 2254, why would you want to start with 2♣ instead of 1♦? I know some for awkward hands 2♣ is bid with only 4 clubs, but that should only be done when you have no good alternatives. As for 2434, I would start with 1♥ even with four small hearts -- again, the 2♣ bid should nominally show 5+, you do it with 4 only when running out of other options.

Although partner is likely short in hearts, so is LHO. I don't think there is guaranteed spade fit. Even if you think 4♠ is odds-on (which is pretty bizarre to me), what is your plan to uncover it? Overcall 1♠ with 3-card?

+1

It depends on the rest of your system preferences. For pairs that use 1♠-3♣ as Bergen raise, this works great -- they only need to adopt a simple change of using 3♦ and 3♥ as Bergen raises. But if they use 3♣ for something else (one popular treatment is to show invitational hand with clubs and no spade support), they would have to find another bid for forcing raise.

Except that geocities web site has closed...

I know a player who once passed a 20-HCP hand and got clear top score as that's the only pair not getting minus...

At unfavorable vulnerability I'd certainly be more cautious, but with equal vul I see nothing wrong with raising to 4♦ on 3-card support (or sometimes 4-card support when diamonds splits 4-6). At least it deprives opponents some room for cuebidding, and opponents are not really apt to double 4♦ with fit in major(s) (nor would a double necessarily be the winning action)...

I think it also sort of depends on opps level. If partner is marked with a couple of diamonds, what is the chance of slam facing an initially passed partner? Most of the time 5-level should be safe, but not always, for example facing: Qxxx, Ax, xx, QJxxx. If I can count on partner having 5th spade, I will bid more aggressively. But there is no way for me to tell. I can certainly live with 5♠, in fact I might bid it at the table, but it is far from clear-cut.

The logic should be different because these are very different auctions. In (1♦) X (XX), opponents have announced majority of high cards, the chance for the advancer to have a hand that want to defend against 1♦-XX is so slim, unless the opponent psyched in XX. Now consider the auction of 1♦ (2♣) P (P); X (XX), it is quite normal for the responder to be trap-passing (actually opener's reopening double is sort of catering to that possibility), opponents haven't shown dominant combined values, and the overcaller is in perfect position to psych the XX, EXACTLY because many pairs never discussed the action over this XX.

5♣ shows a flexible hand (and forward-going), 3415 or 3316 shapes are ideal.