4nt after negative double

[bb79]

what is 4nt in this sequence:

 

1♦ - (3♠) - X - (pass)

4nt ??..

 

X=negative

[manudude03]

prefer to play it as 6♦-4♣ hand, something like x Kx AKQJxx AQTx

[Siegmund]

I certainly play it as pick a minor, but I can't honestly say I've ever considered what length.

 

It would certainly make sense to use 4N and 5C to distinguish different club lengths.

[JLOGIC]

I remain convinced that this double has to be game forcing to have even remotely reasonable auctions, but I don't know anyone who plays that way (though I'm sure some must exist).

 

If 4C was forcing there would be no problem, and you could play 4N as natural and quantitative (which it should be, what else can you do with a balanced 19 that's reasonable? ).

 

However if 4C is not forcing then you have to jump around and stuff, so playing 4N as 6-4 in the minors has a lot more use. That being said, 4N quantitative has more use since a lot of hands that could bid a forcing 4D with tricks will just make a least of evils 4N call.

 

So, I don't know. Undiscussed I would have taken it as quantitative probably.

 

Also it can be noted that if bids were forcing over this double then 4S would logically show a strong hand for hearts (and allow for keycard by the doubler, or cuebids). That solves that problem also.

[peachy]

Negative Dbl over 3S begins to morph into "values" Dbl. It is still negative but the shape requirements are completely different and more relaxed than after 1D(1S)X, and it is left in more often. If not, our side is like a baby in the wilderness with no resources. 4NT as RKC for hearts makes no sense. But this is one of the situations where partnership agreement is necessary, both as to the parameters of the negative Dbl and as to opener's followups.

[bluecalm]

I remain convinced that this double has to be game forcing to have even remotely reasonable auctions, but I don't know anyone who plays that way (though I'm sure some must exist).

 

Some polish players play that double at 3level is game forcing (Lesniewski, Martens) although I am not really sure how far they take it. I know they can't stop in 3♠ after 3x overcall but dunno about 4m.

 

I really want to have natural 4NT here playing standard.

I mean if somehow 18-19 balanced is not part of 1♦ then we could use it for different purposes but as it is it seems to be the most common strong hand type and I wonder what would one bid not having natural 4NT there.

[Flameous]

Without ever having made any real agreements of this situation, I wouldn't be sure either 4C or 4D was forcing. I'd assume 4S shows heart support with slammish hand. If I have both minors, I have a 5C bid. So I consider the biggest problem being slammish hand with long diamonds, so I want 4NT to be rkc for them. Also goes nicely with the principle that RKC is for the last bid suit when there is no trump agreed.

I'm not quite sure why you think 4NT should be quantitative... if I hold 18-19 bal, I'm just going to pass this happily without 4 hearts and sometimes even with.

[hanp]

I'd assume quant.