Fourth Suit Forcing to a Minus Number

[mtvesuvius]

All NV at IMPs, you hold:

 

♠xxx

♥AKxx

♦Kx

♣Kxxx

 

You deal:

 

1♣ - 1♦

1♥ - 2♠*

?

 

*Fourth Suit Forcing to Game

[655321]

I would bid 3♦ now, but why didn't I rebid 1NT to show my minimum balanced hand?

[karlson]

Usually I would play the cheapest suit bid (3♣ here) is nebulous, but that doesn't work well if you rebid 1♥ with balanced hands, since you'd really like to show the 4-5 when you have it.

 

I don't have much experience with this style, but I guess I'd go 3♦.

[rogerclee]

I would bid 3♦ under the given methods and then change my methods. I dislike a style that doesn't bid 1NT with opener's hand, but if you don't, you should make 1♠ the artificial force instead of 2♠, for reasons that should be all too obvious now.

[awm]

I'd bid 3♠ showing 3-4-2-4 shape with a weak spade holding. Easy game. ;)

 

Why does it show that? Well, 2NT would show spades stopped. Since 2♠ by responder denies holding four spades (else 1♠, which is a one-round force) there is no reason to "show my four-card spades" if I have them, and I would bid 2NT with 4414 hands routinely. Of course, 3♣ shows five clubs, 3♦ shows three diamonds, and 3♥ shows a 5-6 hand. So what's left? Some hand without a spade stopper, but with only four clubs and without three diamonds. Which is... tada... 3-4-2-4 with a weak spade holding. :)

 

There are certainly good and bad things about bidding up the line with balanced hands. This is not one of the problems. In fact the method looks good here, since 3NT (if it's right) will be played by partner, protecting the weak spade holding from the lead.

[P_Marlowe]

3C. Since for me 3C is the default bid, I choose this one.

 

Pass is not an option.

 

If 2S already forced to game, you could go with 3S, but for

me this would promise add. strength, because at one point

in time opener someone has to beginn with limiting his hand.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[655321]

Why does it show that? Well, 2NT would show spades stopped. Since 2♠ by responder denies holding four spades (else 1♠, which is a one-round force) there is no reason to "show my four-card spades" if I have them, and I would bid 2NT with 4414 hands routinely. Of course, 3♣ shows five clubs, 3♦ shows three diamonds, and 3♥ shows a 5-6 hand. So what's left? Some hand without a spade stopper, but with only four clubs and without three diamonds. Which is... tada... 3-4-2-4 with a weak spade holding. :)

But partner sitting opposite may, sadly, not be privy to this wonderful chain of reasoning. He may believe that a raise of the 4th suit still shows 4 cards, and (perhaps using kenrexfordian logic of his own) elect to play in the Moysian. Only to be brought back to earth when dummy appears and reveals the 3-3 fit.

 

If you want to play NT from the other side, the solution is to play transfer responses.

[andy_h]

Why does it show that? Well, 2NT would show spades stopped. Since 2♠ by responder denies holding four spades (else 1♠, which is a one-round force) there is no reason to "show my four-card spades" if I have them, and I would bid 2NT with 4414 hands routinely. Of course, 3♣ shows five clubs, 3♦ shows three diamonds, and 3♥ shows a 5-6 hand. So what's left? Some hand without a spade stopper, but with only four clubs and without three diamonds. Which is... tada... 3-4-2-4 with a weak spade holding. :)

But partner sitting opposite may, sadly, not be privy to this wonderful chain of reasoning. He may believe that a raise of the 4th suit still shows 4 cards, and (perhaps using kenrexfordian logic of his own) elect to play in the Moysian. Only to be brought back to earth when dummy appears and reveals the 3-3 fit.

 

If you want to play NT from the other side, the solution is to play transfer responses.

To add to that, not only has 2♠ taken a whole bidding level 3♠ makes it two levels worse.

 

As for the posted hand, I would bid 3♦. Thanks for Kx. 2NT would be my 2nd choice.

[helene_t]

I like Adam's reasoning but without having discussed this I think I would still go for 3♦. This shows a singleton or void spades. Wonderful system. Change the system to 1♠ FSF (or Walsh, or some geeky response structure) ASAP.

 

Btw, this 3♦ bid shows 11-18 HCPs which may be a problem as well. OTOH Adam's 3♠ bid shows 12-14.

[kenrexford]

Why does it show that? Well, 2NT would show spades stopped. Since 2♠ by responder denies holding four spades (else 1♠, which is a one-round force) there is no reason to "show my four-card spades" if I have them, and I would bid 2NT with 4414 hands routinely. Of course, 3♣ shows five clubs, 3♦ shows three diamonds, and 3♥ shows a 5-6 hand. So what's left? Some hand without a spade stopper, but with only four clubs and without three diamonds. Which is... tada... 3-4-2-4 with a weak spade holding. ;)

But partner sitting opposite may, sadly, not be privy to this wonderful chain of reasoning. He may believe that a raise of the 4th suit still shows 4 cards, and (perhaps using kenrexfordian logic of his own) elect to play in the Moysian. Only to be brought back to earth when dummy appears and reveals the 3-3 fit.

 

If you want to play NT from the other side, the solution is to play transfer responses.

Kind of unfair there, seeing as I was one of the first to point out on the other thread how .........2♠-P-3♠........5♦ was just "to play" because neither 2♠ nor 3♠ showed a four-card spade suit (at least for many of us). :P

 

Now, the election to play in the Moysian (if there is one), well..... :)

[helene_t]

This is different since we are more likely to elect to play 4♠ in a Moysian than 6♠ in a Moysian.

[Old York]

If responder has a Spade stop, he should not be bidding 2♠ here, so what possible reason could there be?

 

You cannot make any positive bid here, so the best you can do is deny a spade stop, deny 5 hearts and deny 3 card diamond support. The 3♣ bid shows more than 3 Clubs, which is the only positive aspect of this hand

3♠ should show 4 cards or at least a partial stopper

 

I vote for 3♣ as the lesser of all evils. I think partner has a strong hand with 5/4 in the minors and a possible Spade singleton

Edit: If partner rebids 3♦ then 5♦ might play ok, If he rebids 3NT then I get a new partner, after a 3♥ rebid then 4♥ playing in 4-3 should be reasonable

 

Tony

[whereagles]

2NT here shows around 12-14 balanced, which is exactly what I have. So that's what I bid.

[Old York]

2NT here shows around 12-14 balanced, which is exactly what I have. So that's what I bid.

Does it not also show a high card in the suit? I do not think this bid is limited to 12-14 as it is forcing

 

Tony

[Hanoi5]

3♥.

[vuroth]

No interest in changing my system. 3♦, I guess, but it's a good problem, and I really hate my options.

[JLOL]

If 2S denies spades then I would bid 3S also.

[jdonn]

2NT here shows around 12-14 balanced, which is exactly what I have. So that's what I bid.

Does it not also show a high card in the suit? I do not think this bid is limited to 12-14 as it is forcing

You have not met whereagles. Partner has denied length in a suit, we have xxx in it, the opponents are almost certain to lead it, therefore let's bid notrump.

[P_Marlowe]

If responder has a Spade stop, he should not be bidding 2♠ here, so what possible reason could there be?

<snip>

2S does not deny a spade stopper, it just denies 4 spades.

 

It is the only forcing bid responder has, so if we wants

to set a certain suit as truumps, because he wants to

go looking for slam, 2S is the bid, he has to choose.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

2NT here shows around 12-14 balanced, which is exactly what I have. So that's what I bid.

Does it not also show a high card in the suit? I do not think this bid is limited to 12-14 as it is forcing

 

Tony

I believe it's more important to give priority to showing shape/strength than to worry about things like stoppers. By bidding 2NT you complete the description of your hand. That way pard has an easy time deciding suit and level. After 2NT pard has ways of asking for the spade stop if that worries him.

 

Some people disagree with me about priorities. Those people are terrified about opponents cashing a suit they haven't even bid, and in which pard can well have AKQ. This is a fear I will never understand.

 

The consequence of this fear is to distort shape and strength with strange bids that may well put you in bad contracts in the long run.

[Old York]

If responder has a Spade stop, he should not be bidding 2♠ here, so what possible reason could there be?

<snip>

2S does not deny a spade stopper, it just denies 4 spades.

 

It is the only forcing bid responder has, so if we wants

to set a certain suit as truumps, because he wants to

go looking for slam, 2S is the bid, he has to choose.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

Exactly

 

And if partner is looking for a minor suit slam, clubs may be better than diamonds

He will never bid 6♣ if he thinks you hold ♣xx

 

The only logical reason for partner to bid 2♠ is as a game force with minor suit slam ambitions, or as a game force with 3 card Heart support (and no Spade stopper), bidding 3 Clubs leaves the door open for both

 

Tony

[MickyB]

I dislike a style that doesn't bid 1NT with opener's hand, but if you don't, you should make 1♠ the artificial force instead of 2♠, for reasons that should be all too obvious now.

Interesting...surely it's this style, where opener can still have four spades in a 4423 pattern, that benefits more from responder being able to rebid a natural 1♠?

[helene_t]

Yes, but it's also this style that is more harmed by responder having to skip a level of bidding space in order to inquire about opener's hand when so little is known about it.

 

Even if 1♠ is fsf, opener will rebid 2♠ with four spades. So some Dutch players (well, at least it is the way it works in Beidemeijer Rood, not sure if anyone play that system) play 1♠ as either natural or a generic force.

 

This seems to create some problems when opener has 4414 or 4405 and 15+ points. The auction starts

1♣-1♦

1♥-1♠

3♠-4♣/♦*

 

*is this a cue for spades or is it a hand too strong for 3♣/♦ last round?

 

Even worse, suppose opener has a 4414 or 4405 18-count. Should he bid 4♠?

 

I am sure Ken Rexford can come up with a workaround but the easiest solution is probably for responder with 5♦/4♠ to bid 1♠ immediately with less than GF hands, and 2♠ over 1♥ with GF hands. Then 1♠ (fsf) denies four spades, and opener rebids 1NT with a balanced hand whether he has four spades or not.

[Old York]

1♣-1♦-1NT works well if you play that the 1♦ response denies a biddable 4 card major (Staymanic)

 

Tony

[MickyB]

Even if 1♠ is fsf, opener will rebid 2♠ with four spades. So some Dutch players (well, at least it is the way it works in Beidemeijer Rood, not sure if anyone play that system) play 1♠ as either natural or a generic force.

 

This seems to create some problems when opener has 4414 or 4405 and 15+ points. The auction starts

1♣-1♦

1♥-1♠

3♠-4♣/♦*

 

*is this a cue for spades or is it a hand too strong for 3♣/♦ last round?

 

Even worse, suppose opener has a 4414 or 4405 18-count. Should he bid 4♠?

Washington Standard uses a similar 1♠ rebid. Now opener's 2♥ rebid is ART, a good raise of spades - they open 1♥ with 5♥6♣ so this isn't needed as NAT. Even if you do have a penchant for opening your longest suit, I suspect the 2♥ rebid could be used as a good raise - it must be playable to allocate a higher call to show 5♥6♣.