Auction question

[ajm218]

1♠ 2♥

2♠ 3♦

4♥

[aguahombre]

What is the framework? Std? 2/1? what have the other bids shown? I think in some partnerships 4♥ would not exist. In some it might even be a splinter with diamond support. Maybe it is a bad opening bid with good 3-card heart support. As stated many times, I believe space-consuming jumps in forcing auctions should be VERY specific.

 

I prefer 4♥ to not happen at all without prior discussion.

 

edit: in ours, we would have 6-3 with good cards in the 2 majors, and a couple worthless doubletons in the minors.

[gwnn]

6♠, 3♥ I guess would be the logical meaning, probably 22 with relatively little in the way of high cards in the minors.

[aguahombre]

6♠, 3♥ I guess would be the logical meaning, probably 22 with relatively little in the way of high cards in the minors.

my slow editing...I should have waited for your post.

[Crunch3nt]

Playing "standard" as opposed to 2 over 1, I can't think of another meaning for 4H other than as a splinter agreeing diamonds. 2S has 100% denied 3H.

[P_Marlowe]

Matter of agreement, the meaning of 4H should be fairly precise defined.

 

In fact, I would nearly always bid 3H, since responder did not limit his hand

up to now.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: And I would definitly not agree, that 4H is a splinter.

[helene_t]

Playing "standard" as opposed to 2 over 1, I can't think of another meaning for 4H other than as a splinter agreeing diamonds. 2S has 100% denied 3H.

I don't think so. We could still wan to play in our 6-3 in spades even if we know we have a hearts fit.

 

I think 6322 with values concentrated in the majors make sense. Wouldn't assume this to be a splinter undiscussed.

[andy_h]

Sorta like a picture jump with 6+S (usually 7 I think) and 3H.

[ONEferBRID]

I'm assuming the pair was NOT playing 2/1 GF.

Thus, 2H just promised one rebid and that was 3♦ .

So a 3♥ support bid now by Opener would not be forcing.

That's my only explanation for the 4H bid.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

If the 2H bid WAS a 2/1 GF, then the delayed 4H-jump could be construed as a splinter* for the last bid suit ( ♦ ) , but I'd be afraid to use it.

________________________________________________________________

* " An unusual jump, which makes no sense otherwise, guarantees a fit for the last-named suit by Partner and shows a Singleton or a Void in the suit in which the jump is made. "

___________________________________________

The following are standard splinters in partner's original suit:

1♣ - 1♦

1♥ - 4♣! = splinter for ♥

 

1♣ - 1♠

2♠ - 4♣! = splinter for ♠, slamtry.

[aguahombre]

With 7-3, we no longer have a picture, because we must have a control in one of the minors (or 14 cards)

[andy_h]

Picture/fit/concentrated jump, whatever you want to name it.

[Apollo81]

6♠, 3♥ I guess would be the logical meaning, probably 22 with relatively little in the way of high cards in the minors.

agree

[OleBerg]

If 2♠ is non-forcing and 3♦ guaranties four, splinter is the only thing that makes sense to me.

 

The hands that warrants concealment of an eight-card-fit, with a non-forcing bid, is so rare; a splinter in diamonds is much more likely to be usefull.

 

Also consider that 3♥ -something, 4♥ is an option too, so it isn't even all the hands.

 

If opener really wanted to suppres his hearts, he must have a hand that would love to hear 3♠ on 3♥.

 

I am not familiar with 2/1, but if 2♠ is forcing, picture makes more sense to me, than does splinter. But I don't find it clearcut.

[fromageGB]

OK, another point of view : 4♥ is ace asking agreeing diamonds.

 

That's actually what it would be for me. 2♠ does not show 6, it is just a hand not strong enough to bid 3♦, or a hand too strong for 3♦ . (3♦ is about a 15/16 sort of strength.) But with 4 or 5 diamonds and 17+ I am delighted to go slamming.

[whereagles]

In my own pet system this would show a 6-3 with picture bid overtones

[Codo]

To me this is easy:

2 ♠ showed 5+ spades, but Minimum.

After 3 ♦ partner shows real heart support (3+) and real Minimum (10-12).

 

3 ♥ had been stronger (13-14).

[helene_t]

I'm assuming the pair was NOT playing 2/1 GF.

Thus, 2H just promised one rebid and that was 3♦ .

So a 3♥ support bid now by Opener would not be forcing.

That's my only explanation for the 4H bid.

Nah, 3♦ is GF even in Acol.

 

If 2♠ is NF then 4♥ is a little weird but maybe it could be based on a very minimal hand with 6 chunky spades that didn't want to encourage too much by bidding 3♥ before.

 

Not sure if 3♥ would be forcing in SAYC (some sources say 1♠-2♥-3♥ is an exception to the rule a 2/1 promises a rebid, that makes no sense to me but maybe some people play that). But if 2♠ is forcing but 3♥ is not then this sequence makes perfect sense as a picture bid with 3-6 majors.

 

Dunno if we should assume 2/1 in threads like this. But as long as 2♥ promises a rebid it doesn't really matter here.

[hanp]

Dunno if we should assume 2/1 in threads like this.

Since this is the A/E forum, I would think so.

[OleBerg]

Dunno if we should assume 2/1 in threads like this.

Since this is the A/E forum, I would think so.

???

[hanp]

Hehe, got you Ole.

[aguahombre]

Hehe, got you Ole.

Knew you were trying to zing someone.

[OleBerg]

Hehe, got you Ole.

But I don't get it.

[helene_t]

Hehe, got you Ole.

Knew you were trying to zing someone.

He was trying to zing AWM. OleBerg was collateral damage.

[hanp]

No, I wasn't hoping for anybody in particular. I was hoping for a reaction though.

[gnasher]

We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:

 

- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.

 

- It's the only way to avoid tiresome discussions on the lines of "It's standard to play it as x". "No it isn't." "It's standard in 2/1." "Who said we're playing 2/1?" "2/1 is standard." "No it isn't - in Barbados Precison is standard."