ok so you bid a late 4sf

[gwnn]

You have a nice hand:

 

KJxx

Ax

KQTxx

Ax

 

imps, opps are silent

 

1♦-1♥

1♠-2♦

3♣-3♥

??

 

What would partner's 3♦, 3♥, 3♠, 3NT, and other bids mean (how many points, what distribution, etc). What do you bid now.

 

What do you bid?

 

What would you have bid if you had agreed xyz and pd had bid 2♣ 2nd round?

[jdonn]

It's hard to answer since 3♣ doesn't make any sense to me. The choice is between 2♥ or 2NT based on style, and probably between those 2NT would sit better with more players although I know some 2♥ bidders feel strongly.

 

So if I had bid 2NT last round and partner bid 3♥ showing five good hearts and suggesting notrump might be wrong, I would think this is an easy 4♥ bid. If I had bid 2♥ last round and partner bid 3♥, I would bid 3NT since in that case I wouldn't have suggested notrump yet so it seems right to do so eventually.

[helene_t]

3♣ is normally paterning out and not FSF.

[Guest Jlall]

Agree, 2N was clear over 2D (partner will know you have an unbalanced hand for this bid).

 

Now anything can be right, partner doesn't know we have a club stopper.

[655321]

Agree with 2NT instead of 3♣.

If I had to describe what hand would bid 2NT there, it would be "probably 4252, somewhere around a 17 count".

And, by golly, look at your hand!

:P

[han]

Agree that 3C made no sense, normal 2NT.

[awm]

I like 3♣.

 

What shape would you expect for 2NT over 2♦? Keep in mind that a lot of people rebid 2NT on balanced hands with 18/19 points rather than rebidding 1♠ over 1♥. So it seems like for 2NT over 2♦, you're not 4-2-4-3. Perhaps this shape (4-2-5-2) is possible but I think 4-1-5-3 has got to be a candidate, and probably 4-1-4-4 as well.

 

So if you bid 2NT with 4-1-5-3, what is 3♣? I suppose it could be 4-0-5-4 but this is a pretty uncommon shape to waste a call for. And it would be nice to have a rebid on hands lacking a club stop, or hands like this one where your club stopper is ♣Ax. Keep in mind that partner might've rebid 1NT over 1♠, and his 2♦ bid (while it could just be a good fit for diamonds) often tends not to include club cards. Do you really want to play 2NT or 3NT with ♣Ax opposite xx? And if so, what would you rebid if the club ace were the spade ace (AKJx Ax KQTxx xx)? It makes a lot of sense to me that 3♣ here should show extra values, not especially distributional, with concern about the club suit (whereas 2NT would show clubs well controlled).

 

For partner over 3♣, I would interpret:

 

3♦ = my hand is really poor, can we just play 3♦?

3♥ = a fairly good five card heart suit, willing to play 4♥ opposite doubleton.

3♠ = no club control, probably 3-4-4-2 or 3-5-4-1 or 3-5-3-2 (with bad hearts if holding five)

3NT = club stopper, not an embarrassingly bad hand

 

In this auction my next call is 4♥ over 3♥, with Hx, expecting this to play better than 3NT. Perhaps partner has ♠Qxx ♥KQJxx ♦xxx ♣xx, or similar with one more diamond and one less card in a black suit.

[TimG]

Don't you want partner to have something in clubs to play 3NT? And, isn't it likely that 3NT is better declared from his side when he has a little something in clubs (like Qxx)?

 

I think 3♣ should show something in clubs, probably 4153, but could also be this 4252 hand that does not want to declare NT.

[jdonn]

Don't you want partner to have something in clubs to play 3NT? And, isn't it likely that 3NT is better declared from his side when he has a little something in clubs (like Qxx)?

 

I think 3♣ should show something in clubs, probably 4153, but could also be this 4252 hand that does not want to declare NT.

If partner has JTx or J9x then 3NT is better from our side, on top of which he will never bid it anyway. So at best it's not clear who should declare.

[awm]

If partner has JTx or J9x then 3NT is better from our side, on top of which he will never bid it anyway. So at best it's not clear who should declare.

But most of the time when partner doesn't have a club stopper, he'll bid three of a suit next. Now you can bid 3NT to express doubt (i.e. "I could use a little help in clubs, but I'm willing to try 3NT if you are.") Partner will leave this in with J9x/JTx/Qx but not with xx/x. Assuming we don't also bid 3♣ with strong club holdings (those bid 2NT) the message should be clear.

[pclayton]

I really don't think 3♣ is any less descriptive than 2♥ but I prefer 2N as well. I think 3♣ tends to show a 4153 or a 4054 and 2N a 4252.

 

I think pard has decent diamonds but 6 not so good hearts. Ax Jxxxxx xxxx x seems right. Pard knows I don't have 3 hearts. Why else would he suggest hearts as a strain?

 

I'm bidding 4♥.

[skjaeran]

I also prefer 2NT on the previous round.

 

Now I'm bidding 4♥.

[jdonn]

If partner has JTx or J9x then 3NT is better from our side, on top of which he will never bid it anyway. So at best it's not clear who should declare.

But most of the time when partner doesn't have a club stopper, he'll bid three of a suit next. Now you can bid 3NT to express doubt (i.e. "I could use a little help in clubs, but I'm willing to try 3NT if you are.") Partner will leave this in with J9x/JTx/Qx but not with xx/x. Assuming we don't also bid 3♣ with strong club holdings (those bid 2NT) the message should be clear.

When you bid 2NT if partner thinks you need very good clubs he will still bid 3 of a suit and you won't go back to notrump. Only when his hand is very good for notrump (ie JTx of clubs!) will he stop investigating. So it works the same in those cases.

[awm]

Well, give partner the previously mentioned:

 

♠Qxx ♥KQJxx ♦xxx ♣xx

 

After 1♦-1♥-1♠-2♦-2NT, what do you bid? I suppose you could bid 3♥, but it seems as though you have a balanced hand, partner has a balanced hand, you have no eight-card major suit fit, and partner promises control of the unbid suit. I'd tend to bid 3NT here, reserving 3♥ for a hand like:

 

♠xx ♥KT9xxx ♦Kxxx ♣x

 

Where we might legitimately prefer a suit contract regardless of "stopper" considerations.

 

I'll just add to this post instead of re-posting:

 

Ignoring hands with a lot of extra distribution (that would probably bid 3♦ or 2♠) or with a real heart fit (2♥), we have:

 

(1) Strong hand with nothing in clubs (xx, xxx).

(2) Strong hand with something in clubs but not a great stop (Ax, Qx)

(3) Strong hand with a good club holding (AJx, KJx, AQx, etc)

(4) Strong hand with an actual club suit (thus 4144 or 4054 shape)

 

It seems like there are basically two styles. My preference is to bid 2NT with hands (3) and (4), and to bid 3♣ "fourth suit forcing" with hands (1) and (2), planning to follow partner's suit bid with 3NT on hand (2) to imply doubt. It is possible to find a club fit over 2NT since partner can bid 3♣ with four.

 

The alternative style seems to be bidding 3♣ with hand (4), 2NT with (2) or (3), and make a slight distortion like 2♥ on Hx or 3♦ on five good ones with hand (1).

 

There are also some people who propose bidding 3♣ on both hand (1) and (4) but since these hands seem quite opposite I've never really understood why that's supposed to work.

 

In any case, my opinion is that hand (4) is fairly rare, and you often want to play 3NT on these hands anyway. I don't think I lose much by bidding 2NT on hand (4), whereas there are a lot of potential gains by right-siding and clarifying opener's holding on (1) and (2). I don't really expect partner to run from 2NT to a suit on a balanced hand (prefer partner just bid 3NT, so bidding a suit over 2NT shows real shape) but if I bid 2NT with hand (2) I really need partner to offer alternatives to 3NT when his club holding is xx or the like.

 

Again, this is style, and you could play a style where after a notrump rebid partner often looks to avoid 3NT in case there is "no stopper" but as far as I can tell no one actually does this at the table even people who often rebid notrump with stoppers like Qx or Jxx in unbid suits.

[Winstonm]

I think in this situation - where the 4th suit is pinpointed - there is much less room to argue for 2N over 3C. What is the purpose of patterning out to a hand that has announced its weakness with a 2D preference (I assume no xyz)? I would be more inclined to bid 2N with a singleton heart and AQx of clubs. And why would we want to bid 2N with Ax if partner holds Qxx?

 

If partner holds Qxx of clubs, and we hold Ax, we want partner to play the hand.

[helene_t]

Agree with that, WInston, 3♣ is a good bid IMHO.

[Cascade]

It's hard to answer since 3♣ doesn't make any sense to me. The choice is between 2♥ or 2NT based on style, and probably between those 2NT would sit better with more players although I know some 2♥ bidders feel strongly.

 

So if I had bid 2NT last round and partner bid 3♥ showing five good hearts and suggesting notrump might be wrong, I would think this is an easy 4♥ bid. If I had bid 2♥ last round and partner bid 3♥, I would bid 3NT since in that case I wouldn't have suggested notrump yet so it seems right to do so eventually.

This looks perfect to me.

[Cascade]

3♣ is normally paterning out and not FSF.

I think 3♣ would be fourth suit here.

 

I want some extra values though.

[Fluffy]

4SF is a convention used by responder, not opener.

[Cascade]

4SF is a convention used by responder, not opener.

Perhaps not this hand ...

 

but what does opener do when he has a 5-4-2-2 with extra values and without a stopper in the fourth suit after partner gives a simple preference on the second round?

[Yogeshdg]

You can either open 1nt (playing strong nt) or after 1h please bid 2spades. 1spade is a gross underbid.

[skjaeran]

You can either open 1nt (playing strong nt) or after 1h please bid 2spades. 1spade is a gross underbid.

Disagree. 2♠ would be a huge overbid. 1♠ caters for all hands not strong enough to GF. I play 1♠ as a forcing (allowed to pass without normal strength for 1/1), but it's absolutely OK to rebid 1♠ NF on this hand.

[han]

Agree with that, I play 1S as NF but it is absolutely clear.

[mikeh]

For those (misguided) posters who think that 3♣ was an acceptable call, consider that responder may well have a hand such as 1=4=3=5, or even more club-oriented, but without enough to do other than take a preference to 2♦. After all, for him to introduce clubs at any stage of this auction would show an opening hand (if 2♣/1♦ were gf, which it is for many here) or a near-opener for those who don't play 2/1.

 

Thus how would you 'FSF'ers handle a hand such as [hv=n=sxhajxxdjxxckxxxx&s=sajxxhdaqxxxcaqxx]133|200|[/hv]

 

Furthermore, I simply fail to see any real advantage to playing 'fourth suit forcing' by opener! Yes, if responder holds Qxx in clubs and we have Ax, we'd like notrump from his side, but are we really designing our bidding methods to cater to this very specific possibility? While abandoning all hope of reaching our best fits when opener is 3-suited and responder has modest values? Which is more likely?

 

I think those who advocate 3♣ have looked at the problem with a huge blind spot in their vision: give them the 4=0=4=5 (even with fewer values) that I described above, or some 4=1=5=3 with similar values, and ask them how to show that hand over 2♦ and there would be a stampede to '3♣, wtp?'.

 

Now, ask yourself to be responder and you see a 3♣ bid. How on earth can we bid intelligently when 3♣ can be 4=2=5=2 or 4=0=5=4?

 

My apologies to anyone I have offended by my tone, but I haven't finished my morning coffee yet B) :) :)

[awm]

On Mike's example hand, my auction would start:

 

1♦ - 1♥

1♠ - 2♦

2NT(1) - 3♣(2)

...

 

(1) Natural, game try, guarantees club stopper. This is "almost forcing" because partner will normally correct to diamonds on a poor hand.

 

(2) Natural, usually five-card suit.

 

Now opener can raise clubs and... I don't see all that many problems on this sequence.

 

My basic philosophy on all sorts of auctions is this:

 

(1) If we have bid three suits naturally, then bidding notrump shows a stopper in the fourth suit. It may conceal real length in the fourth suit.

 

(2) If we have bid three suits and notrump naturally then bidding the fourth suit is natural (pattern). After notrump has been bid, partner will normally pattern out (although pass is possible if the notrump bid was NF).

 

(3) If we have bid three suits naturally but have not bid notrump, then bidding the fourth suit is an artificial force, typically denying the desire to bid notrump. Usually this implies weakness in the fourth suit, or an anti-positional stopper, though occasionally I will also bid the fourth suit on a hand with substantial extras and no other way to force.