Strange Infrequent Calls

[kenrexford]

2♦(weak)-2♠-3♦-4♣

P-4♦?

 

3♦-3♥-P-3♠

P-3NT-P-4♣

P-4♦?

 

1♥-1♠-2♥-P

3♣-3♦-3♥-4♥?

 

What meaning would you attribute to each last call? What might be an example hand(s) for each? How would you contrast the meaning for the actual bid with other options that might apply in the situation and in some way inferentially afect the meaning of the chosen call?

 

I have no particular agenda here. I found it interesting discussing these with a regular partner, largely because our assumptions on two of these were almost polar opposites. One of these was from years ago with two world champions also being on different wavelengths.

 

I could see many GP's applying in these situations, such as whether each of these is a game or slam or lead or shape or shortness or whatever bid, whether certain strains are or are not "in focus," and to what degree definition versus flexibility (quantitative bash, maybe) applies.

 

I also have no idea what is ideal, what is expected as the "normal meaning," and what is expected as the "expert standard" meaning.

[Fluffy]

all of them show a maximum with fit in partner's minor, and it is very likelly that all of them have shortness in the other major as well.

[OleBerg]

Choice of games, all three.

 

Can of course be a slam-try, if you overrule partners choice, and move to highest game.

[skjaeran]

All show strong (in context) raises to 5 of partner's minor.

[jdonn]

The second and third are clear. I guess the first is also a strong raise of clubs, but I could see merit playing it as choice of games with something like 6-4 in the majors I guess.

[kenrexford]

Interesting. Everyone so far is all-or-nothing. (EDIT: Except JDONN)

 

For the "choice of games" crowd, the meaning is fairly obvious. However, for the "strong raise" crowd, you are eaving out one step in the problem.

 

What would you expect partner to have for the strong raise? What other options did the person have, if any?

 

The last, for example, is interesting. If 4♥ is in fact a strong raise of diamonds, then perhaps Advancer could have bid 5♣, 4♣, 4NT, 3NT(?), or 5♦, or maybe even 4♠, all as strong raises of diamonds. How would you interpret the options, the interpretations of which seem to better define what the selected option shows. On the last, the auction proceeded with a 5♥ call by Opener, doubled by Advancer, necessitating a lead decision for Overcaller, and interpretation of the various options was critical to the lead.

 

On the first, there may be no alternative power raises, but what would be the minimum you would expect for a power raise?

 

On the second, is there any other option for a power raise of clubs? If so, how does that affect the selection of 4♦? Either way, what would be a minimum expectation for the 4♦ call?

 

(BTW, there are actual hands involved. I'm keeping them secret to avoid bias.)

[qwery_hi]

Choice of games, all three.

 

Can of course be a slam-try, if you overrule partners choice, and move to highest game.

I mostly agree.

 

In sequence (3), I know partner is limited.

In sequence (1) , (2) partner's hand could be much stronger.

 

The interesting thing is in (2) and (3), one person is

5+5+ either way so choice of games is perfect for finding the

best fit.

 

But in 1, I think 4D is more of a courtesy waiting bid, to give partner

a chance to describe his hand further.