The Last Word

[kfay]

You're in a discussion with an expert about:

 

1♠-1N

3♣-4♠

 

Two aspiring players said:

1) 3-card limit raise

2) 3-cards, minimum

 

You get the last word, so what do you say?

[Phil]

#2.....

 

#1 used to be standard but I can't see how that is playable.

[Little Kid]

2 for me too. I think it is more important to leave room for cuebids over a limit raise than a minimum.

[jdonn]

I mean it's not needed for either meaning. With either you can start 3♠, then either cuebid or sign off next. I think Kokish recommends 2 but with a more specific meaning that I can't exactly remember.

[Jlall]

Jxx xxx xxxx KQx (or a little weaker if this is a 1S-2S to you).

[quiddity]

#2 is bizarre. Why would I want a jump to 4S to show a hand that I initially intended to treat as a 2-card preference, a hand so bad that it's likely partner will not care whether it has a third trump or not, a hand so flat that it's quite possible we belong in 3NT?

 

Meanwhile, if I start the limit raise with 3S, how do I show the extra trump? Isn't partner going to be interested in that feature, given that by definition we must be exploring for slam?

 

If 4-level cuebidding is important then perhaps the jump should say something specific about red-suit holdings, but I don't think it should show a piece of garbage.

[Bbradley62]

It's to play. I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Kx, xxxx, xxxx, Kxx.

[jdonn]

It's to play. I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Kx, xxxx, xxxx, Kxx.

Wow heck no, the odds for slam are way way too good opposite that. For slam purposes that hand is probably as good as a limit raise at this point, it has gone up that much in value.

[peachy]

If 1NT is forcing, then 4S is the 3-card limit raise. Opener needs to know about 3-card limit raise. Everything else goes via 3S, when agreeing or false preferring spades, and can be weak or stronger [ within the limits of a 1NT response].

I have had this agreement for years, after an expensive misunderstanding long ago.

[ONEferBRID]

If 1NT is forcing, then 4S is the 3-card limit raise.  Opener needs to know about 3-card limit raise.  Everything else goes via 3S, when agreeing or false preferring spades, and can be weak or stronger [ within the limits of a 1NT response].

I have had this agreement for years, after an expensive misunderstanding long ago.

Here we go again about the SJS over partner's 1NT! response ( 1 Rnd Force ) .

Peachy has it right.

4S = 3 card limit raise.

3S could be as few as 2 cards Sp, normally a minimum 1NT!, and little or no interest in partner's 2nd suit, Cl.

[peachy]

deleted

[aguahombre]

Whether we play constructive simple raises is important to know. But, JD is right that it isn't needed for either meaning, no matter which style we are using.

 

However, it can convey some kind of specific holding, no matter which --a crap 3-card L.R. with no bullets, no filler in the J.S, suit.

[awm]

I'm pretty sure that 3-card limit raise is the "standard meaning."

 

Agree with others that it seems better for 4♠ to show the "garbage raise" and start the three-card limit raise with 3♠ to improve slam bidding.. but this is not what I'd assume without discussion.