pclayton Posted October 7, 2007 Report Share Posted October 7, 2007 ♠Kx ♥AQ9xx ♦Jxx ♣AJx. No opposing bidding, standard agreements. 1N by you - 2♥ - 2♠ - 3♣ - 3♥ - 3♠... ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 7, 2007 Report Share Posted October 7, 2007 3N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 don't like 3N, 5224 with weak diamonds is def possible and I'd rather be in 4S opposite that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 It seems clear to me not to bid 3NT, since partner would've bid 3NT over 3♥ with diamonds securely stopped. Seems like 4♠ would show this hand (can't be a real spade fit and not bid 3♠ over 3♣). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Agree with not bidding 3NT. 4S is probably best, but if you clearly agreed that 3H showed hearts (and not a cue for clubs) then you could bid 4D to let partner choose the best contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Agree with not bidding 3NT. 4S is probably best, but if you clearly agreed that 3H showed hearts (and not a cue for clubs) then you could bid 4D to let partner choose the best contract. Why wouldn't that be a cue for spades? Maybe choice of games is good but it would require an agreement, and anyway given that I have already denied spade support I have no qualms about raising at this point. Anyway partner has either 6 spades or no diamond stopper, so 3NT is no option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Agree with all that Josh. I raised 4D as an alternative in situations where this is clearly discussed (I like to think it would be for Arend and me). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 maybe biased, but I suspect I would had bid ♠ before (maybe 4) Now looks obvious to raise spades at last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted October 8, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Pard held: ♠AQxxx ♥J ♦T9x ♣KQxx. I bid 4♣ and we ended up in a silly 5♣. Both black suits were foul, but the ♥K was on and diamonds were 4-3 (I think). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Partner knows you have 3 diamonds most likely, he should consider bidding 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatchett Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 not very keen on partner's 3♠ call, I think you have to bid 3NT with a tripleton diamond. On the given auction over 3♠ I would bid 4♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Pard held: ♠AQxxx ♥J ♦T9x ♣KQxx. I bid 4♣ and we ended up in a silly 5♣. Both black suits were foul, but the ♥K was on and diamonds were 4-3 (I think).I also would have tried 4♣ over 3♠; the problem being that responder is unlimited and may have slam ambitions. You have wonderful cards opposite something as little as AJxxxx x x KQ10xx. The fault, I think, lies in 3♠. He has a blah 5134, with limited values: certainly, if you pass 3N, it rates to be the right spot the vast majority of the time. And it is critical that he limit his hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Why doesn't 4C show clubs? 3H is often just cooperating in clubs, and 4C seems to now confirm clubs. Agree that responder is supposed to bid 3N though. edited Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Why doesn't 4C show clubs? 3H is often just cooperating in clubs, and 4C seems to now confirm clubs. Agree that opener is supposed to bid 3N though. Justin, did you mean that 'opener' is supposed to bid 3N or was it responder? (I suspect your answer may be 'both') 4♣ does show clubs, but I am happy to do so with Kx AJx in the blacks and a partner who, over my 3♥ call, didn't bid 3N. While I am minimum, it's become a pretty good minimum with little wasted. If he has 5 clubs, I'm happy to play 5♣. If he has 6=4 in the blacks, we can still get back to 4♠ when 6♣ is not good. He knows we have a 6-2 major suit fit so he ain't going to 5♣ when game is the limit. The one hand he can't have is 5=1=3=4 with no slam interest. I suspect that, for most, 3♥ was ambiguous: either coming in clubs or worried about diamonds for 3N. Responder's obligation is to clarify his overall direction, having made a gf showing 5=4 or better in the blacks. To bid anything other than 3N on his hand is an egregious error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted October 8, 2007 Report Share Posted October 8, 2007 Sorry I meant responder should bid 3N with xxx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 3♥ does not really show ♥ for me but more like values and a problem in ♦. Partner with ♦xxx will bid 3NT because I have 2♠ so 3/4♦. I bid 4♥ now, asking partner to pick a major suit game. ♥ will be better than ♠ as the shortness in our weak suit ♦ is the also the short trump side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 Why doesn't 4C show clubs? 3H is often just cooperating in clubs, and 4C seems to now confirm clubs. Agree that responder is supposed to bid 3N though. edited I actually got a rule about this: "when responder to 1NT showed 2 suits and opener can support both below game, then 3 of unbid suit shows a stop". In this case 3♥ shows stop and doubt about diams. Resp should bid 3NT now due to misfit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 Why doesn't 4C show clubs? 3H is often just cooperating in clubs, and 4C seems to now confirm clubs. Agree that responder is supposed to bid 3N though. edited I actually got a rule about this: "when responder to 1NT showed 2 suits and opener can support both below game, then 3 of unbid suit shows a stop". In this case 3♥ shows stop and doubt about diams. Resp should bid 3NT now due to misfit.That's a bad rule, imo. I prefer (and use) Justin's ambiguous meaning: it either shows heart values and a club fit, intending to move over 3N but without first round diamond control, or heart values and concern about diamonds, intending to pass 3N. This leads to more efficient auctions, since, when we move over 3N, responder knows more about our hand than if we bid 4♣ over 3♣ to set trump. Thus, 3♥ followed by 4♦ would be agreeing clubs and showing the ♥A and the ♦K... two cues while over an immediate 4♣, we can't show the ♦ control below 5♣, even if partner cooperates by cuing 4♦...and he might not be able to do so: AQxxx x QJx KQxx opposite Kx AJxx Kxx AJxx as an example (yes, we probably still get there with this very quickly chosen example, but see how easy the auction is if we can bid 3♥ over 3♣). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 That's a bad rule, imo. I prefer (and use) Justin's ambiguous meaning: it either shows heart values and a club fit, intending to move over 3N but without first round diamond control, or heart values and concern about diamonds, intending to pass 3N. This leads to more efficient auctions, since, when we move over 3N, responder knows more about our hand than if we bid 4♣ over 3♣ to set trump. Thus, 3♥ followed by 4♦ would be agreeing clubs and showing the ♥A and the ♦K... two cues while over an immediate 4♣, we can't show the ♦ control below 5♣, even if partner cooperates by cuing 4♦...and he might not be able to do so: AQxxx x QJx KQxx opposite Kx AJxx Kxx AJxx as an example (yes, we probably still get there with this very quickly chosen example, but see how easy the auction is if we can bid 3♥ over 3♣). I agree with you, but all this is a very good advertisement for another Justin method, the transfer advances where after a transfer responder's next bid is also a transfer. This lets opener definitively agree the second suit at the 3 level (1NT 2♥ 2♠ 2NT 3♣), lets responder describe his hand with a third bid below 3NT (toss in the Kokish shortness rule? 3♥ over 3♣), and means if opener does bid 3♥ over the club showing bid it is definitely a heart suit / worry about diamonds in some combination, never coming in clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 That's a bad rule, imo. I prefer (and use) Justin's ambiguous meaning: it either shows heart values and a club fit, intending to move over 3N but without first round diamond control, or heart values and concern about diamonds, intending to pass 3N. This leads to more efficient auctions, since, when we move over 3N, responder knows more about our hand than if we bid 4♣ over 3♣ to set trump. Thus, 3♥ followed by 4♦ would be agreeing clubs and showing the ♥A and the ♦K... two cues while over an immediate 4♣, we can't show the ♦ control below 5♣, even if partner cooperates by cuing 4♦...and he might not be able to do so: AQxxx x QJx KQxx opposite Kx AJxx Kxx AJxx as an example (yes, we probably still get there with this very quickly chosen example, but see how easy the auction is if we can bid 3♥ over 3♣). I agree with you, but all this is a very good advertisement for another Justin method, the transfer advances where after a transfer responder's next bid is also a transfer. This lets opener definitively agree the second suit at the 3 level (1NT 2♥ 2♠ 2NT 3♣), lets responder describe his hand with a third bid below 3NT (toss in the Kokish shortness rule? 3♥ over 3♣), and means if opener does bid 3♥ over the club showing bid it is definitely a heart suit / worry about diamonds in some combination, never coming in clubs. I have used this second bid-transfer over 2N but not over 1N: it seemed to work ok, altho I don't play it in any current partnership Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 My thoughts: First, I like something that involves transfers after transfers. The simpler version I have used I called Minor Suit Smolen. Second, that's not critical here. Although it gains in the sense of right-siding, using 3D to agree clubs is as efficient as using 3D to agree diamonds. Third, I would reserve 3♦ to agree whichever minor 3♣ shows. I want to reserve the other major as natural after a 3♣ second suit call, to cater to 5431's. I would use the other major to agree whichever suit 3♦ shows. If Responder has a 5431 holding with the minor that 3♦ shows, hopefully we use 3♣ as a specialized puppet that allows showing 5-3/3-5 in the majors. If partner bids 3♦ in this sequence, then it makes some sense to play 3♥ and 3♠ as a probe/cue ambiguous, bidding the other major as a cue/probe and the same major as a probe/cue for the unshown minor. I would tend to isolate the cue meaning (or shape), but I may tend toward overly slam oriented in an auction like this. With the actual hands, Opener would be able to bid 3♥ as a natural call, showing the fifth heart. Had Opener held one fewer hearts and one more club, he'd bid 3♦, showing club support. Responder could then bid 3♥ as a cue (or NT probe) or 3♠ as a diamond cue/probe. Lacking that technique, I agree that Responder should limit out at 3NT. If 3♥ was natural, then 3♠ should agree hearts, IMO, and be a cue (two top spades, heart support, slammish). If 3♥ was a cue/probe, then 3♠ would seem to be a cue in furtherance of the implied club fit, and clearly too strong an action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 That's a bad rule, imo. You can file your complaint with Ron Klinger, which is where I got it from :) Anyway, just to clear it out, bidding a stopper doesn't necessarily mean 100% misfit. Just that the hand prefers to try for 3NT before embarking on the minor suit game/slam. So I guess we play it more or less the same way in the end.. lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted October 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 I have a question for those with more experience with transfer extensions: 1N - 2♥ - 2♠ - 2N - 3♥ Do you think this promises 5 hearts? I would think so, since opener can just accept with clubs and cue later if necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted October 10, 2007 Report Share Posted October 10, 2007 It seems like over 1nt-2♥-2♠-2nt(clubs): 3♣ = shows club fit3-red = no fit, values in the bid suit, worried about other red suit3♠ = shows spade fit3NT = strength in the reds, no fit, want to play 3NT most of the time After 1nt-2♥-2♠-2nt-3♥, responder bids 3NT with diamond cards. Note that this denies holding three hearts, and is frequently a heart singleton (5-1-3-4). If responder bids something other than 3NT (to deny diamond cards) then 4♥ by opener can show the five hearts. Typically I actually play relay in these auctions instead of natural followups though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.