sayc sequence

[gwnn]

What do you think this auction means in SAYC. I know I know "we don't know SAYC". But I'm wondering:

 

1♠-2♣

2♥-3♦*

4♦-4♥

 

3♦ is 4sf, where 2♠ would be a doubleton preference, 3♥ would be invitational and 3♠ just a limit raise of spades with real clubs.

 

I am particularly interested in the last two bids...

[SoTired]

in SAYC, I would consider the 4D showing a 5440. 4H = 4-card heart support with more than a min opening, which would just jump to 4H over 2H. I can understand those that think 4H shows only 3-card support and suggesting a 4-3 4H contract, but I think most of those hands will bid 3N over 2H instead.

 

The awkward nature of the 3D 4sf shows a drawback of SAYC vs 2/1.

[awm]

First off, 3♦ is clearly a game force in SAYC. Even though 4th suit may not be (in general) forcing to game, in a 2/1 auction it must be. With this in mind, consider what hands opener can't have for 4♦:

 

(1) No 5th heart, would rebid 3♥.

(2) No 6th spade, would rebid 3♠.

(3) No diamond stopper, would rebid 3NT (or 4NT with substantial extras).

(4) Not 3+♣, would rebid 4♣ with 5-4-1-3 or the like.

 

So it seems that opener's shape is 5-4-2-2 or 5-4-3-1 with bad diamonds. I think 4♦ is basically a punt saying "please pick a contract partner." In this case I'd read 4♥ as being to play, either suggesting a moysian with 3♥ and no great diamond stop (with a real diamond stopper and no fit, likely to bid 3NT over 2♥ directly), or possibly what was initially a heart slam try but with an apparent problem in diamonds. In any case it's "to play."

 

One of the problems in SAYC is that it's tough to raise opener's second suit in a forcing way after a 2/1 auction. Note that in straight SAYC 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♠ would be forcing, since all limit raises go through 1♠-3♠, so at least you don't have to worry about the forcing spade raise. The forcing heart raise is a different story. My preference is to use 1♠-2♣-2♥-4♣/4♦ as artificial raises of hearts with slam interest (these bids are basically unused, since the hand that might want to bid a natural 4♦ is hard to imagine and the hand that rebids 4♣ naturally would start with 1♠-3♣ strong jump shift). Obviously this is not strictly part of SAYC though.

[Echognome]

First off, 3♦ is clearly a game force in SAYC. Even though 4th suit may not be (in general) forcing to game, in a 2/1 auction it must be. With this in mind, consider what hands opener can't have for 4♦:

 

(1) No 5th heart, would rebid 3♥.

(2) No 6th spade, would rebid 3♠.

(3) No diamond stopper, would rebid 3NT (or 4NT with substantial extras).

(4) Not 3+♣, would rebid 4♣ with 5-4-1-3 or the like.

 

So it seems that opener's shape is 5-4-2-2 or 5-4-3-1 with bad diamonds. I think 4♦ is basically a punt saying "please pick a contract partner." In this case I'd read 4♥ as being to play, either suggesting a moysian with 3♥ and no great diamond stop (with a real diamond stopper and no fit, likely to bid 3NT over 2♥ directly), or possibly what was initially a heart slam try but with an apparent problem in diamonds. In any case it's "to play."

 

One of the problems in SAYC is that it's tough to raise opener's second suit in a forcing way after a 2/1 auction. Note that in straight SAYC 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♠ would be forcing, since all limit raises go through 1♠-3♠, so at least you don't have to worry about the forcing spade raise. The forcing heart raise is a different story. My preference is to use 1♠-2♣-2♥-4♣/4♦ as artificial raises of hearts with slam interest (these bids are basically unused, since the hand that might want to bid a natural 4♦ is hard to imagine and the hand that rebids 4♣ naturally would start with 1♠-3♣ strong jump shift). Obviously this is not strictly part of SAYC though.

You wouldn't catch me ever bidding 4♦ with 5=4=2=2 or 5=4=3=1 with bad diamonds. So, you don't have a clear response to FSF, then just make up the smallest lie. When even that is awkward, then use the cheapest lie. Here I would just bid 3♥ and hope to recover. 4♦ pushes us way past any comfort point and precludes the very likely contract of 3NT. Ok, so sometimes we'll play in a heart Moysian. It happens. I think 3♥ gives us the best chance of finding the right contract.

 

I'd rather save 4♦ for a good hand with no clubs that thinks 3NT is wrong. Maybe something like AKxxx AKxx Axxx ---. Heck, maybe 6♦ is the spot.

[awm]

Why would responder bid 3♦ with a good hand for 3NT though? It seems like there are two possibilities:

 

(1) Responder's hand is somehow more suited to playing in a suit rather than 3NT, so responder wants to look for extra length in a major. If you lie by showing extra length in a major with your stopperless 5-4-2-2 then you'll play in a seven-card fit in that major. This may be right or wrong, but in any case you haven't gained anything by lying over making a bid like 4♦ that actually shows this hand.

 

(2) Responder has slam interest. In this case mis-describing your hand is not likely to be the best path to a making slam.

 

It's not clear to me what exactly the purpose of 4♦ natural is in this auction. If responder has a minimum game force with four diamonds he wouldn't make the confusing call of 3♦ (artificial remember) and would just bid 3NT on the apparent misfit with full game values. If responder has extras with four diamonds (a hand too good for a 3NT rebid), he's bidding on over opener's 3NT/4NT in any case.

[Echognome]

Why would responder bid 3♦ with a good hand for 3NT though? It seems like there are two possibilities:

 

(1) Responder's hand is somehow more suited to playing in a suit rather than 3NT, so responder wants to look for extra length in a major. If you lie by showing extra length in a major with your stopperless 5-4-2-2 then you'll play in a seven-card fit in that major. This may be right or wrong, but in any case you haven't gained anything by lying over making a bid like 4♦ that actually shows this hand.

 

(2) Responder has slam interest. In this case mis-describing your hand is not likely to be the best path to a making slam.

 

It's not clear to me what exactly the purpose of 4♦ natural is in this auction. If responder has a minimum game force with four diamonds he wouldn't make the confusing call of 3♦ (artificial remember) and would just bid 3NT on the apparent misfit with full game values. If responder has extras with four diamonds (a hand too good for a 3NT rebid), he's bidding on over opener's 3NT/4NT in any case.

I'd rather bid 3NT than 4♦ if I was *only* worried about shape.

 

I don't see how 4♦ describes a 5-4-2-2 at all. Furthermore, we're just arbitrarily upping the bidding a level. What do you want responder to do with a 1=1=5=6 hand? Should he just rebid 3NT?

 

Furthermore, if responder is more suit-oriented, then you give him room to describe his hand further. What if he is 3=1=4=5 and has a great hand? Or a 3=1=3=6? In SAYC, he has to 3♦ first in order to force. Now I'm going to bid 4♦ and cross his intentions totally.

 

Edit: If you are going to say that 3♠ is forcing, then fine. Make him 2=1=4=6. 4♦ does us no favors at all.

[helene_t]

SAYC is not documented to that level of detail. Nevertheless, I'm sure it must be a 5440 with extras.

 

Btw, I don't think it's correct that 3♠ by responder would be NF. It may not be very strong but I think it's at least GF.

[Fluffy]

The real question is if 4♥ is weak or strong.

 

IMO it is weak (Specially in sayc :() showing a very good hand, wich hates the club void opposite, such as ♠Jx-♥KQxx-♦x-♣AKJxxx

[awm]

This is really another instance of the following general question, which comes up in many systems and has been debated on these forums many times. Basically the situation is:

 

(1) We have bid three suits naturally (opponents passing).

(2) We have not made a natural notrump bid.

(3) We are in a game-forcing sequence.

(4) We have not yet found/agreed to a fit.

 

The question is: At this point, what does it mean to bid the fourth suit? There seem to be three interpretations:

 

(1) We are game forced, so the fourth suit is natural. Typically this shows exactly 5440 (if by the person who has already shown two suits) or 6-5 (if by the person who has bid only one suit) although it might also be used with one less card and substantial extra values.

(2) It's "fourth suit forcing" and shows a hand with no clear direction. Typically this is a pretty flat hand with no known fit, lacking the right holding in the fourth suit for notrump.

(3) It's "two way" and should initially be treated as "fourth suit forcing" on a hand with no clear direction, but if the fourth suit is later rebid this transforms the meaning to "natural."

 

If playing method (1), the hand with no clear direction is bid by pretending to extra length in one of the suits already bid. If playing method (2), the hand which actually holds the fourth suit will normally bid notrump at some appropriate level and hope partner can introduce the fourth suit if there's a real fit there (it's pretty much universal that if we've bid three suits and notrump, bidding the fourth suit is natural).

 

As the posts here show, I'm of opinion (2) and Echognome is of opinion (1). I expect we'd have the same dispute in auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♦-2♥(ART GF)-3♥ in SAYC or in auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♦ in 2/1 GF.

[Echognome]

As the posts here show, I'm of opinion (2) and Echognome is of opinion (1). I expect we'd have the same dispute in auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♦-2♥(ART GF)-3♥ in SAYC or in auctions like 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♦ in 2/1 GF.

Agree, except for in 2/1, I play that fourth suit is natural. I'm sure it's just different schools of thought. I just think my school is better. :( :D

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

a few comments

 

#1 I am not 100% sure, that 3H instead

of 3D would be only inv., I would assume,

that 3H is gf

#2 I am also not 100% sure, that 3S instead

of 3D would be only inv., I would assume,

that 3S is also gf

#3 Bidding the 4th suit is always dangerous,

but since opener denied (?!) a 4 card

diamond suit, what would he bid with 5440 (?!),

the 4D should show add. strength (what else)

and is asking for further description

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Codo]

This bidding is impossible in sayc :)

1.Opener has no 5440. With that hand, he had bid 2 ♦ not 2 ♥.

2. He has no 6. spade or 5. Heart. (No major bid)

3. He has no club support. (No club bid)

4. He has no diamond stopper. (no 3 NT)

 

But opposite to Adam and Matt, I am from a school where you bid 3 Spade with such a hand. And of course this school is MUCH better. :) :D

 

So I believe, that he has a 5431 hand which is strong enough for Game and was afraid that 3 Diamond was not gameforcing and that his 3 Spade bid may be passed.

 

What does responder have?

I don´t know.

A very strong hand with Hearts, but unable to launch blackwood or

A weak hand, with 3 Hearts, 1 or 2 spades and no diamond stopper

 

Both hands are uncommon, I bet for the second choice.

[ochinko]

4♦ denies a high card diamond stopper (not even half a stopper as Qx), and expresses willingness to play in any of the three naturally bid suits, so the way I play it the perfect distribution for it would be 5=4=0=4, not 5=4=4=0.

[helene_t]

1.Opener has no 5440. With that hand, he had bid 2 ♦ not 2 ♥.

I assumed that we rebid 2♥ with that hand, like in

1♠-1N

?

the general rule being that a 4-card major is bid before a 4-card minor.

 

Thinking more about it, it's probably technically superior to bid 2♦ over 2♣. Is there a "standard" for this?

[ArtK78]

For the reasons already mentioned by several posters, the 4♦ bid almost certainly shows 5440 distribution.

 

Depending on the partnership agreement, 3♦ is either natural or fourth suit forcing. It depends on whether the partnership is allowed to pass a 2NT rebid by responder. Clearly, playing SAYC, opener can pass responder's 3♣ rebid. If the partnership is allowed to pass responder's 2NT rebid, then responder has to bid something other than 2NT or 3♣ to force to game. So, 3♦ may be artificial on something like 2-3-3-5, 2-2-3-6, 1-3-3-6 or 2-3-2-6.

 

If 3♦ is not absolutely showing 4 diamonds, opener cannot bid 3NT without a diamond stop, but he would not go past 3NT with only 3 diamonds (unless he can raise clubs with a very good hand). Most likely, he would choose to rebid 3♠ on a 5 card suit as the least of evils type of bid.

 

In the second case, where 3♦ shows diamonds, opener would bid 3NT without 6 spades, 5 hearts or 4 diamonds.

 

So, opener must have 4 diamonds.

 

One poster raised the issue of bidding 2♦ rather than 2♥ on 5440. I have not seen anyone do that except when there is a great disparity in the strength of the two suits - for example, KJxxx Txxx AKQx -. In that case, opener is really treating his hand as if it were 5350 rather than 5440. It is normal to bid spades followed by hearts followed by diamonds with 5440.

[Codo]

So, opener must have 4 diamonds.

 

One poster raised the issue of bidding 2♦ rather than 2♥ on 5440. I have not seen anyone do that except when there is a great disparity in the strength of the two suits - for example, KJxxx Txxx AKQx -. In that case, opener is really treating his hand as if it were 5350 rather than 5440. It is normal to bid spades followed by hearts followed by diamonds with 5440.

Okay Don Quixote on his way again. Am I alone in rebidding Diamonds?

 

Why on earth shall I rebid Hearts if I have a three suiter without clubs?

It is never easier to show the hand.

It makes me bid my diamond on the 4. level. (like you suggest in this example)

 

It is just a waste of space.

 

And I miss exactly nothing by bidding 2 Diamond, because we still can find our Heart fit....

[helene_t]

With 5440 and a minimum, you will lose the heart fit when it goes

1♠-2♣

2♦-2♠

pass

 

With extra values, opener could introduce hearts now, but then his third bid will be 3♥ rather than 3♦, also slightly more expensive. You could agree that he should do so with extras as a kind of "reverse" bidding. Alternatively you can agree always to bid hearts first so that bidding diamonds first would show 5341.

 

On the other hand, when responder bids the 4th suit as in this topic, starting with 2♦ preserves space.