manudude03 Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 How would you play 4m in the sequence 1NT-(3H)-3S-(P)4m You can assume 3H is purely pre-emptive. I had a mini-debate about this with my partner and neither of us are sure about our opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 I think it's natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted June 21, 2009 Report Share Posted June 21, 2009 Cuebid for spades. Yes there are hands where you are stuck with no heart stopper hand have to raise 3S on a doubleton, and yes it might be nice to be able to bid your 5 card minor and try to play 5 of a minor instead of a 52 spade fit. However those hands are rare and having to bid 4H with all good hands with spades is just too bulky imo. Cuebid will come up 10x as often, and you will survive in the 52 spade fit anyways most of the time as opposed to last minute minor fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Cue bid for S of course. Opener has 2 choices, raise the S either directly or by a cue bid, or else bid 3NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Assuming 3S was forcing with 5+ spades, then 4m can only be a cuebid for spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Cuebid. I'd think it would be more frequent than it is natural and definitely more beneficial if we were ever hunting for spade slam. Putting all the spade raises as 4♥ is putting the extra space a waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Strongly prefer 3♠ to be forcing. 4m should be a cuebid for spades, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Clearly cuebid for spades. I can remember this happening once and I held xx xx in the majors. The lesson there is I sometimes make idiotic 1NT openers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 I would have played it as natural at the table, but willing to admit that this isn't the best treatment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Strongly prefer 3♠ to be forcing. 4m should be a cuebid for spades, IMO. Same for me. Opener has at least 3 card decent ♠ support and less than a min based on the bidding so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Strongly prefer 3♠ to be non-forcing. Otherwise there is incredible overload - many ways to get to 4♠ and no way to play a part-score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Strongly prefer 3♠ to be non-forcing. Otherwise there is incredible overload - many ways to get to 4♠ and no way to play a part-score. Play transfer advances and have the best of both worlds. c'est ne pas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Cue, agreeing spades. The NT opener will have a fairly control rich hand,maybe with concentrated values, he could also havebid 4H, which than would show a control rich handwith distributed values. With kind regardsMarlowe 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.