This has been asked before

[jillybean]

1♥ (P) 2♦ (3♣)

3♥ (P) ?

 

Is 4♣ here a cue in support of ♥'s? Using the rule "because you have bid over 3nt you are showing control in support of pards suit." or so I was told ;)

 

How would you play 3♠ here?

[whereagles]

I take it you mean support of hearts, not spades.

 

3♠ would be a bit muddy... in principle, it's natural. But since it's almost impossible for pard to have spades, what happens in practice is he'll bid 3NT with a club stop or something else without one. So basically 3♠ is what you'd bid without a club stop, regardless of what you have in spades.

 

From the logics of the above paragraph, and from the fact that 4♦ now would be a strong 1-suited hand, 4♣ should logically be a cue in support of hearts, yes.

 

Now, the problem is while all this is logical, pard's logic might be different than yours, so he might take a completely different view...

 

But all in all, I don't see any other sensible way to bid, except perhaps blast to some game/slam ;)

[kenrexford]

I would also take ths as a "cue" in support of hearts, but not as a control bid in support of hearts. This seems more like a quantitative call, like LTTC. The club control situation should be determined later.

[hotShot]

1♥ (P) 2♦ (3♣)

3♥ (P) ?

 

Is 4♣ here a cue in support of ♥'s? Using the rule "because you have bid over 3nt you are showing control in support of pards suit." or so I was told :)

 

How would you play 3♠ here?

Your options are:

 

pass => If your 2♦ has not been GF as in 2/1, this should be all minimum hands even those without ♥ fit.

 

4♥ => ♥ fit strong enough, no slam interest

 

3♠ => forcing, natural or at least good stopper in ♠, no ♥ fit, no ♣ stopper, promising 5+♦ (or why didn't you bid 1♠?), partner should bid 3NT with ♣ stopper or 4♦ if he has 3 of them, 5♦ seams possible contract.

 

4♣ => you could have shown game interest with 4♥, which would have finished the auction. Bidding 4♣ implies that you want more, it is at least a mild slam invitation and yes you know, what you want to play (hopefully 6♥, 6NT and 6♦ might be other options).

So you should have ♥ support or holding a very good 8+♦ suit or have a lot of extra strength including 2 ♣ stopper for a possible NT slam.

[skjaeran]

As others have said, you rebid 3♠ to force partner to bid 3NT with a club stopper.

 

3NT and 4♥ is to play.

 

4♣ is a strong ♥ raise, doesn't promise a control in the suit.

 

4♦ is natural and forcing, invites slam.

 

4♠ would be a splinter agreeing hearts and 4NT would be quantitative IMO (you can bid 4♣ to set hearts first if you're gonna ask for keycards).

[gwnn]

pass => If your 2♦ has not been GF as in 2/1, this should be all minimum hands even those without ♥ fit.

This should be a non-option, 3♥ is forcing in SAYC, I think even in Acol, where 2/1's can be juicy 9 counts, 3♥ should be forcing. What else can you bid with a good hand with hearts? 3♥ as non-forcing is a bad idea, trying to cater to a hand just a little better than a weak two doesn't sound like productive.

 

In SAYC it's customary to play that stopping below game after a 2/1 is possible only:

 

-by responder rebidding his suit on the 3 level

-by responder rebidding 2NT

-by responder giving a doubleton preference (if you play that - I think it's a good idea) on the 2 level.

-by responder raising opener's simple rebid in a new suit to the 3 level

 

This principle should go out to competitive bidding after 2/1's also... We can stop below game in those 4 cases and those 4 cases only.

 

More to the point. Opener can pass on a minimum, and his 3♥ promises a stronger hand, thereby accepting partner's invitational or better bid. 3♥ shows a good hand with good hearts and is GF.

[P_Marlowe]

1♥ (P) 2♦ (3♣)

3♥ (P) ?

 

Is 4♣ here a cue in support of ♥'s? Using the rule "because you have bid over 3nt you are showing control in support of pards suit." or so I was told :)

 

How would you play 3♠ here?

3S shows values, and leaves 3 NT still as

an possible option.

 

4C does agree hearts, but is nor necesarry

a cue.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Finch]

pass => If your 2♦ has not been GF as in 2/1, this should be all minimum hands even those without ♥ fit.

This should be a non-option, 3♥ is forcing in SAYC, I think even in Acol, where 2/1's can be juicy 9 counts, 3♥ should be forcing. What else can you bid with a good hand with hearts? 3♥ as non-forcing is a bad idea, trying to cater to a hand just a little better than a weak two doesn't sound like productive.

I'm not going to comment on SAYC, but 3H certainly isn't forcing in Acol.

 

Yes, it's become common now to play that uncontested 1H - 2D - 3H is forcing in Acol, but this is not an uncontested auction. Holding, say, Axx KQJ10xx Qx xx you are going to bid 3H here, because that it what your hand is about. If partner passes you won't have missed game.

[gwnn]

Yes, it's become common now to play that uncontested 1H - 2D - 3H is forcing in Acol, but this is not an uncontested auction.  Holding, say, Axx KQJ10xx Qx xx you are going to bid 3H here, because that it what your hand is about. If partner passes you won't have missed game.

so what can you rebid on AKx KQJTxx Qx xx ? or AKx KQJTxx Kx Qx? ugh.

[han]

Agree that 3H is non-forcing. At least for me.

[Zelandakh]

My preference (when playing Acol) is also for 3♥ forcing here, but then I would X rather than bid 3♥ with Frances' hand. I guess it's really a matter of whether your immediate bids are stronger or weaker than going via a double. There's probably a technical reason why one is better than the other, but I'm not sure what that might be.

 

 

(-: Zel :-)

[the hog]

Yes, it's become common now to play that uncontested 1H - 2D - 3H is forcing in Acol, but this is not an uncontested auction.  Holding, say, Axx KQJ10xx Qx xx you are going to bid 3H here, because that it what your hand is about. If partner passes you won't have missed game.

so what can you rebid on AKx KQJTxx Qx xx ? or AKx KQJTxx Kx Qx? ugh.

Agree Csaba, if 3H is forcing after 1H 2D, then it should also be forcing after a 3C interference by the opposition. It is not logical if it isn't, Acol or not.

[han]

I actually changed my mind and think forcing is better. Not sure if logic has much to do with it.

[Guest Jlall]

Def hate 3H non forcing. Just pass with a bad hand and 6 hearts and partner can reopen X if he has something and then you can bid 3H. I cannot see the logic in a freebid at the 3 level being non forcing if its not a raise.