2 suiter after 1D-3D

[MFA]

♠ K

♥ AKT84

♦ Q

♣ AQT732

 

All vul, imps.

 

(1♦) - pass - (3♦) - ?

 

Now, sir, it's your turn. What is your medicine?

 

They play 5card spades, 4card hearts, 1♦ shows 4+, strong NT. 3♦ is purely preemptive.

[H_KARLUK]

3♥

 

4♣ leaping michaels with regular p

[gwnn]

Now everybody knows to bid 4♣, showing 5-5 with a major with this hand.

 

Next time when you post a hand of the same strength but 2317, everybody will bid 4♣, showing clubs.

 

If 4♣ doesn't show a major also, I must bid 3♥.

[jdonn]

Now everybody knows to bid 4♣, showing 5-5 with a major with this hand.

 

Next time when you post a hand of the same strength but 2317, everybody will bid 4♣, showing clubs.

No I'll be an honest fellow and just curse politely when I'm 2317.

 

I'll try 4NT. It's getting higher than necessary if we end in hearts, but I like my odds much better if I get both suits into the picture. But yes in reality I could of course bid 4♣, clubs and a major.

[effervesce]

What's so bad about playing 4♦ here as any two-suiter instead of both majors? You retain the ability to show natural clubs.

[ASkolnick]

The only problem is if partner is 4-3 in the majors, he bids 4♠, but I agree with bidding 4♦ as a 2 suiter.

[jdonn]

It would be nice on this hand, but does anyone actually have the agreement that a cuebid on auctions like this is any two suits? And how do you reconcile it with auctions where the cuebid is Michaels? Count me out if the whole gain is to bid 4 of the other minor naturally.

[han]

Josh, do you seriously play that 4C shows a 2-suiter?

[jdonn]

Josh, do you seriously play that 4C shows a 2-suiter?

Yes, just like if they opened 3♦ on my right.

 

Do you think acting shocked makes it seem unbelievable? It's not a particularly strange agreement.

[han]

It's not a strange agreement at all, it is standard in some places but I didn't expect you to play it.

 

By shocked, do you mean: Something that jars the mind or emotions as if with a violent unexpected blow?

[gnasher]

I sometimes play 4C as two-suited here. In one partnership I played that four of a minor was two-suited in all situations where:

 

- Opponents have shown one real suit, or one unspecified major (but may also have opened 1NT or a loose club or diamond)

- Opponents have not promised game-forcing or invitational values.

- It’s the bidder’s first chance to act

- Bidder’s partner has done nothing but pass or open/overcall 1NT

- The bidding is now at the two- or three-level

[jdonn]

By shocked, do you mean: Something that jars the mind or emotions as if with a violent unexpected blow?

I think so. The truth is I'm simply bitter since for the life of me I don't know how you and Helene can just change your allocated bridge hands on a whim.

[awm]

4♦, which I actually play as showing any two-suiter.

 

Occasionally I will end up at the five-level when partner bids 4♠.

[whereagles]

3♥ + 5♣.

[MFA]

We don't play non-leaping michaels, because I don't fancy that convention. Also, 4♦ shows both majors, and 4♦ followed by 5♣ would thus be a slam try.

 

What would you bid in that context?

 

So far, we have a couple of votes for 3♥ and 1 vote for 4NT. More votes/comments are most velcome. ;)

[Codo]

I try 4 ♣ to show clubs.

 

In this particular hand game may be as often good in clubs as in hearts.

And as a bouns: When they compete, I am able to show my second suit.

 

And sometimes, I need to say sorry team, I messed it up and missed 4 Heart. But hey, they are used to this.

[MFA]

[hv=d=w&v=a&n=s95432h65da6ckj65&w=saj8hqj73dkj753c8&e=sqt76h92dt9842c94&s=skhakt84dqcaqt732]399|300|Scoring: imps[/hv]

 

I know what happened at 5 of the tables were the auction started 1♦-p-3♦ to south.

 

One S tried 3♥ and played there for 170.

One S tried 4♥, 620. Ugly but practical.

One S could bid 4♣ michaels and ended up with 1370.

Two S (including me) tried X and 5♣ over partner's 4♠, which was passed at both tables after a long tank each time. 620.

 

The scores were 2*1370, 9*620, 1*170.

 

Double might look very ugly, but for me it was that or 4NT. The stiff ♠K & ♦Q made me pessimistic about finding partner with much, so I decided not to risk a 5♥-1 scenario via 4NT.

 

After X, my plan was to bid 4♥ over 3♠ (followed by 5♣ if partner persisted with 4♠) and 5♣ over 4♠. After preempts X+bid is not a pronounced one-suiter but a more flexible hand that wants to hear from partner regarding strain.