basic question

[jillybean]

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 4♦

 

4♦ here is highly encouraging but not forcing since 3♥ is available to create a force. Agree?

[inquiry]

you may as well play this as forcing, as stopping on a dime in 4 of a minor with a fit cost too much in the long run, some people not only play this as forcing, but also rkc for diamonds.

[Cascade]

No. It is forcing.

 

3♥ would be a different sort of hand. In particular 3♥ keeps 3NT open as a possible contract.

 

Playing 4♦ as RKCB is a poor method in my opinion. While it solves a problem for some hands it makes life difficult for any slammish hand that is not suitable for RKCB.

[hotShot]

You need 3♥ to ask about ♥ stopper on the way to 3NT.

You have 3♦ and 5♦ available, I would expect that 3♦ is nonforcing and 5♦ will end the auction. As a consequence 4♦ is setting trump and has at least mild interest in slam and is forcing. Because of the slam interest you would bypass 3NT although you have a ♥ stopper.

[qwery_hi]

What would be the difference between pulling 3NT to 4D after bidding 3H and a direct 4D bid?

[Hanoi5]

I think you have:

3♦ to compete for the part-score or just to compete, i.e. non-forcing.

3♥ to either ask for the stopper or support diamonds later with a strong hand

4♦ to invite to game when you're not sure whether 11 tricks can be taken in diamonds

5♦ to play

 

If

 

You need 3♥ to ask about ♥ stopper on the way to 3NT.

You have 3♦ and 5♦ available, I would expect that 3♦ is nonforcing and 5♦ will end the auction. As a consequence 4♦ is setting trump and has at least mild interest in slam and is forcing. Because of the slam interest you would bypass 3NT although you have a ♥ stopper.

 

is true then I have no way to invite to game, and why would the invitation be given up when there is a way to show it easily?

[P_Marlowe]

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 4♦

 

4♦ here is highly encouraging but not forcing since 3♥ is available to create a force. Agree?

No.

 

4D is forcing, 3H asks primarily for a stopper.

If opener denies one, and either opener or responder

bids 4D after the 3H, than a 4D bid is nonforcing.

 

If you are bypassing 3NT bidding 4D, without knowing,

that you are missing a stopper, than you are looking

for more.

In the given sitiuation responder can know, if opener

has a hand with 1-3-5-4 shape and if the 3 card heart

suit is xxx or AQx.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jillybean]

No.  It is forcing.

 

3♥ would be a different sort of hand.  In particular 3♥ keeps 3NT open as a possible contract.

 

Playing 4♦ as RKCB is a poor method in my opinion.  While it solves a problem for some hands it makes life difficult for any slammish hand that is not suitable for RKCB.

 

With a slammish ♦ hand why not... (other than it gives the opps a clearer lead)

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

3NT (P) 4♦

 

Remember this is no well oiled partnership and I think 4♦ could fall into Mike's 'avoid bids that could cause confusion' category.

[P_Marlowe]

No.  It is forcing.

 

3♥ would be a different sort of hand.  In particular 3♥ keeps 3NT open as a possible contract.

 

Playing 4♦ as RKCB is a poor method in my opinion.  While it solves a problem for some hands it makes life difficult for any slammish hand that is not suitable for RKCB.

 

With a slammish ♦ hand why not... (other than it gives the opps a clearer lead)

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

3NT (P) 4♦

 

Remember this is no well oiled partnership and I think 4♦ could fall into Mike's 'avoid bids that could cause confusion' category.

The problem with this seq. is, that you dont know, that

partner will bid 3NT at the time you are bidding 3H.

 

Look at the slightly different seq.

 

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

4♣ (P) 4♦

 

One may or may not play 4♦ in this seq.

as forcing, but my guess is, that for most the

bid is nonforcing, at least this is certainly a bid

you should avoid making, because it can cause

confusion.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jillybean]

No.  It is forcing.

 

3♥ would be a different sort of hand.  In particular 3♥ keeps 3NT open as a possible contract.

 

Playing 4♦ as RKCB is a poor method in my opinion.  While it solves a problem for some hands it makes life difficult for any slammish hand that is not suitable for RKCB.

 

With a slammish ♦ hand why not... (other than it gives the opps a clearer lead)

 

Agree so then the auction would be;

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

3NT (P) 4♦

 

Remember this is no well oiled partnership and I think 4♦ could fall into Mike's 'avoid bids that could cause confusion' category.

The problem with this seq. is, that you dont know, that

partner will bid 3NT at the time you are bidding 3H.

 

Look at the slightly different seq.

 

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

4♣ (P) 4♦

 

One may or may not play 4♦ in this seq.

as forcing, but my guess is, that for most the

bid is nonforcing, at least this is certainly a bid

you should avoid making, because it can cause

confusion.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

Agree, so then the auction would be

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

4♣ (P) 5♦

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

 

Agree, so then the auction would be

 

1♦ (1♥) 1♠ (P)

2♣ (2♥) 3♥ (P)

4♣ (P) 5♦

As long as you were prepared always to play game.

 

But sometimes you know, that 5D is basically with any

chance, in which case it would be great to stop in 4D.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe