ArtK78 Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 [hv=d=n&v=n&s=sjxhakxdxxcq9xxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Partner opens 2NT (20-21). You are not playing anything special. 3♣ is regular Stayman. 3♠ is Minor Suit Stayman. 4♣ is Gerber. Your call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 I guess 3♠ and pass 3NT, bid 4NT over 4♦, and cuebid over 4♣ (can I? if not I guess I would have to bid 5♣). Seems better than nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 If my system doesn't allow me to show a one-suited slam try in clubs, I think it is, in fact, quite special. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 6NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 3NT. I think the chances of playing 4NT down one because of partner having a 4-card diamond suit outweigh the chances of finding a 10-card club fit, and I don't even know what to do if we find the club fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 If I bid 3C then 4C would partner understand that as a slam try in clubs? If that is not part of the system and I have no slam try in clubs available, I think 4N is about right even though partner won't always evaluate accurately (obviously) since he doesn't know club honors/fits are good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted June 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 While we had not discussed our methods over 2NT specifically, I am reasonably sure that 3♣ followed by 4♣ would be forcing and natural. I was playing with David Treadwell, and I am sure that is how he would interpret that auction, as it is fairly standard without any special agreements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 While we had not discussed our methods over 2NT specifically, I am reasonably sure that 3♣ followed by 4♣ would be forcing and natural. I was playing with David Treadwell, and I am sure that is how he would interpret that auction, as it is fairly standard without any special agreements. OK, I would try that then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Yeah, I think I knee-jerked without thinking because I hated the response structure. 3♣...4♣ seems about right (as long as that sequence does not show something in support of the last bid major, or some other mess). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 While we had not discussed our methods over 2NT specifically, I am reasonably sure that 3♣ followed by 4♣ would be forcing and natural. I was playing with David Treadwell, and I am sure that is how he would interpret that auction, as it is fairly standard without any special agreements. OK, I would try that then. me too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 While we had not discussed our methods over 2NT specifically, I am reasonably sure that 3♣ followed by 4♣ would be forcing and natural. I was playing with David Treadwell, and I am sure that is how he would interpret that auction, as it is fairly standard without any special agreements. OK, I would try that then. me too Me too too. 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.