control / to play?

[kgr]

Both are MP's (it could matter because ♥ pay better, but it shouldn't change the meaning of the bid).

 

1♦-1NT

2♥-3NT

4♦-4♥

 

3NT: to play, 2NT would have been Lebensohl, 3x forcing

4♦: forcing

4♥: control for ♦ or preference for ♥ (eg 3c♥)? (4NT iso 4♥ would have been to play)

....why?

 

1♦-1♥

2♣-2♠

2NT-3♥

3NT-4♦

4♥

 

2♣: real but forcing

2♠: 4th suit GF

2NT: ♠-stop, no 3c♥, better then 3NT

3NT: prefer 3NT over 4♥ opposite a 6c♥

4♦: natural and slam interest (6+♥, 3+♦)

4♥: control for ♦ or preference for ♥ (eg small doubleton; or honour singleton)?

....why?

[dake50]

1st: would expect 4NT as H-Q in this auction if D-slammy.

 

2nd: sounds like responder has hefty 4531/4630, so again 4NT as H-Q.

 

Of course pick-ups have 4NT always conventional. Stuck.

[kgr]

4NT as H-Q

what is H-Q?

[MFA]

These things are often nightmarish for new partnerships.

 

1) 4♥ is a cuebid. I don't think 'sudden desperate' preferences into a 4-3 fit on the four level exist when partner is slamgoing. I would interpret 4♥, 4♠ and 5♣ as cuebids and 4NT as natural. I would be happy to cuebid the ♥Q here if my hand is suitable for a diamond slam.

 

2) Natural. I don't like being excluded from suggesting 4M when one of us has shown a long suit there. To make qualified decisions about playing 5-2s, 6-1s or even 5-1s we need these kind of delayed support bids to show some fit. Or responder would be left to gamble on his own on 4M too often with an inadequate suit.

 

For 4♥ to be a cuebid, when 4M is still feasible because one of us has 5+, a rule of thumb could be that the minor should already have been agreed with a previous cuebid.

The opening hand should bid as described with a stiff H in hearts, minimum and a mediocre diamond suit. For instance.

[Little Kid]

1) 1NT and 3NT both suggest a pretty balanced shape and desire to play in NT, probably 3=3=3=4 (or possibly 3=3=2=5 with a bad club suit?). That doesn't looks like an ideal shape to be playing in a 4-3 fit with, especially if you wrong-side the the contract for black suit stoppers and they could end up forcing declarer. Unless you have extra shape in ♦s or serious slam interests it might be better to pass 3NT at MPs than head for a dubious 4♥ contract or inferior 5♦? 1NT and 3NT seems to imply ♦ tolerance if not fit, so I would take 4♥ over 4♦ as a cuebid here and not a suggestion to play. Partner could possibly have 1 or 2 extra ♦s and be REALLY interested if you have anything to help in ♥s in order to play ♦ slam.

 

 

2) Would take this one as "To Play". By going via 2N you mention you show a slightly better hand than direct 3N? 4♦ could be like a mild slam try to see if you're at the top of your range. In that case 4♥ could very well be a nice place to stop if you don't have too much extra. Responder has shown 6+♥s and you have bid NT, so 4♥ definitely still looks like a plausable contract to play in (rather than the 4-3♥ fit).

[jdonn]

Natural in both cases. Game bidding comes first so you can't cuebid something that might be a playable game if you haven't yet agreed a suit.

[Phil]

On the 1st, game before slam, however in a lot of cases why not bid 2N with Hxx of hearts to allow Opener to pattern out?

 

No opinion about the 2nd - either seem possible to me.

[MarkDean]

I think the second one is clearly to play. On the first one, I think it is a cue (even Qx allowed): if responder had a hand that might play well in a 43 fit, I do not think he should have jumped to 3NT last round.

[karlson]

I think both are cues, I would not bid 3n with 3 decent hearts on the first one or two decent hearts on the second one, and I think the 4d bidder should have real diamonds both times.

[karlson]

It's been pointed out that most of the hands i imagine opener having on the second one don't actually have a heart cue, so I guess then I'm convinced by natural but this auction almost doesn't exist.

[Jlall]

Bidding 4H on stiff H seems normal in the 2nd auction. 3H then 4D suggests hearts that are quite good, otherwise responder would usually just bid 3D over 2N.

[Fluffy]

First one is an obvious cuebid for me, moysan is never proposed as a fit when you have 4NT to slow down.

 

 

Second one sounds like natural, I have my doubts given that you think 4♦ guarantees 3♦s, but if it sounds natural it must be natural, and anyway, what kind of control can you have if you failed to raise before?

[kgr]

Thanks all for the answers leading to the conclusion for me:

1st: you don't play in a 4/3 when slam interest. So that is control

2nd: (less clear); ♥xx or ♥H; proposal to play.

[kgr]

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=skq6hj86dkcj87643&e=shakt4dat6432cakt]266|100|[/hv]

scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.

1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)

2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)

4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)

6♦-All Pass

[kgr]

[hv=d=w&v=b&w=sqj7hkda9854caqt4&e=sathaqjt964dkq63c]266|100|[/hv]

1♦-2♦ (2♦=one suited major, weak or closed major)

2♥-3♥ (3♥=closed major with max 1 honor at the side=>not correct system bid and impossible for West because he has ♥K)

3NT-4♦

4♥-6♦

All Pass (Maybe West should trust East and bid 6♥??)

 

This should have gone?:

1♦-1♥

2♣-2♠ (2♣ forcing, 2♠ 4th suit GF)

2NT- 3♥ (2NT extras)

3NT-4♦

....How to continue to 7♥??

4♥-4♠

5♣-5♦

7♥

[Fluffy]

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=skq6hj86dkcj87643&e=shakt4dat6432cakt]266|100|[/hv]

scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.

1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)

2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)

4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)

6♦-All Pass

Diamonds are too weak to reopen with 4♦, 4♣ is a much better bid

[kgr]

Dealer: East Vul: None Scoring: Unknown

♠ KQ6 ♥ J86 ♦ K ♣ J87643 ♠ [space] ♥ AKT4 ♦ AT6432 ♣ AKT

scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.

1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)

2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)

4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)

6♦-All Pass

Diamonds are too weak to reopen with 4♦, 4♣ is a much better bid

Is 4♣ not more a 0454?

[jdonn]

[hv=d=e&v=n&w=skq6hj86dkcj87643&e=shakt4dat6432cakt]266|100|[/hv]

scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.

1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)

2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)

4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)

6♦-All Pass

3NT is a terrible bid, as it would usually be on this auction. What misfit, they had a 9 card fit but west just didn't bother to find out.